Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Newton Believed a Comet Caused Noah's Flood


Still Waters

Recommended Posts

21 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

Nice dodge, nothing to do with what you said to me.

No dodge, I simply don't care to derail this thread, go find another patsy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, Jor-el said:

No dodge, I simply don't care to derail this thread, go find another patsy.

I could tell by your unsupported BS.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Rlyeh said:

I could tell by your unsupported BS.

Unless you have anything useful to add go sell your wares somewhere else. You are giving skeptics a bad rep.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 hours ago, Jor-el said:

Enki (Sumerian) is identical to the later divine personages Ea (Babylonian), Ptah (Egyptian), Poseidon (Greek) and the biblical Serpent (Hebrew);

Hmmm, I'm not aware of the biblical serpent being a god nor having anything to do with for example the sea in Poseidon's case, so some of these comparisons don't seem to be identical.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, Rlyeh said:

I could tell by your unsupported BS.

Image result for that's a bingo gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Jor-el said:

No I am not injecting unsupported claims. From the standpoint of the believer, God created the universe, a statement that you cannot prove or disprove either way. This in terms of an earlier statement regarding what had God to do with gravity.

You are injecting an unsupported claim (a belief) that cannot be proved. You stated above that it cannot be proved. If something ("God created the universe") cannot be proved  (as you stated) then your claim for it remains unsupported. Hence, you are injecting an unsupported claim.

Edited by No Solid Ground
Link to comment
Share on other sites

46 minutes ago, No Solid Ground said:

You are injecting an unsupported claim (a belief) that cannot be proved. You stated above that it cannot be proved. If something ("God created the universe") cannot be proved  (as you stated) then your claim for it remains unsupported. Hence, you are injecting an unsupported claim.

I believe you are incorrect, proof is not available, evidence is available that supports both conclusions. A hypothesis is a theory that attempts to correlate all the known evidence or data and to come up with an explanation creating a model.

The model is not proof.

What you cannot say is that it is unsupported. You either reject the model or you don't. Or you come up with an alternative model.

Right now there are two models, equally with evidence. One points to the lack of a God. The other using exactly the same evidence comes to the opposite conclusion.

What you cannot do is prove it one way or another.

That being said it becomes repetative and absolutely boring when the same things are repeated on this board with the same people ad infinitum.

It is why I mainly stopped posting here and it is why this board has lost so many members comparing 2006 to the present.

All the interesting topics invariably end with this same stupid argument. Over and over and over again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Liquid Gardens said:

Hmmm, I'm not aware of the biblical serpent being a god nor having anything to do with for example the sea in Poseidon's case, so some of these comparisons don't seem to be identical.

Hi LG,

The biblical serpent is none other than Enki himself.

This is supported by a number of studies, not only archaeological but historical as well. Simply put Satan is the god of this world, well it's more than that this world is named for him. Earth is a derivative of the ancient name EA, another of Enki's names. Enki is the God of Wisdom, and Satan demonstrates the use of such Wisdom in his interaction with Eve. The Serpent is also a metaphor for wisdom.

Caduceus-e1473746660404.jpg

Interestingly, the serpent in Hebrew is translated as Ha Nachash, The Serpent, and it is a pun as well. It has three meanings.

1. (Noun) A literal Serpent.

2. (Verb) To practice divination, observe signs, learn by omens, interpreter of signs, in essence a description of wisdom as well as a practitioner of magic/divination.

3. (Adjective) meaning bright, brazen [as in shiny brass]) with the prefixed article (ha - The) the term acquires the meaning of "The shining one".

What all this means is that we are not dealing with a snake. We are dealing with a divine being, one of the bene-elohim, who are the gods of the polytheistic world.

As for the relationship with Poseidon, well... The Sumerian term ABZU (Akkadian apsû) denotes a large underground body of water, the abode of Enki (Akkadian Ea), god of wisdom and incantations. Poseidon's abode was the Sea and other waters, he was also the God of Earthquakes, and Enki the Lord of the Earth.

The relationship is unequivocal I would say. Besides it isn't just me saying it.

http://www.mesopotamiangods.com/ea-enki-nudimmud-khnemu-ptah-poseidon-oannes-overview/

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Jor-el said:

Then what use is a board that is titled Spirituality VS Skepticism?

It allows people to discuss spirituality and skepticism, and the differences between the two.

Quote

If every subject posted on this board is then reduced to the argument that one cannot prove God. It really then doesn't matter what the actual thread is about if everything is reduced to this simple argument.... every time.

That's really only true if your sole concern is to promote the existence of God.

Quote

I can maintain that God is the author, but the fallacy I think is the argument that humanity doesn't have to study and learn the rules of the universe they inhabit.

This sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I understand the position.  Could you expand on it?

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still think it was localized ice age flooding that caused a lot of the stories. I've got no proof just speculation. 

80458-Im-Out-Leslie-Nielsen-Airplane-6Zf

"I'm just going to let the embers of a flame war slowly smoke as I walk out of the thread."

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, aquatus1 said:

It allows people to discuss spirituality and skepticism, and the differences between the two.

That's really only true if your sole concern is to promote the existence of God.

This sounds interesting, but I'm not sure I understand the position.  Could you expand on it?

Yes it does allow discussion theoretically. It also allows threads to be shot down when every single discussion can be summarized to... you believe in God (spirituality) prove it!!! (skeptic)

Why bother with threads then on any number of topics, all you then need is only one thread...

My sole concern (as it applies to me) is having a productive discussion on a given topic, not having to defend myself from the constant discussion of.... "you speaking of God... he doesn't exist so what you have to say is worthless." Well since this is a spirituality vs Skepticism Board, skepticism is expected, but shouldn't it be limited to the topic being discussed? Why should every topic essentially end in the same way? I've been a member for years and it has only gotten worse.

And yes I am taking the opportunity to say my piece, here. Frustration is evident.

In regards to my final comment, It has long been an argument used by scientists on why they prefer not to believe in a God as an explanation. If we say God did it, then why should we look further? Then the final piece is, let's avoid bringing a god into the subject, man must find his own answers.... It is pretty much what you stated earlier as well.

My view is different, I can say that God did it, but that certainly doesn't give any answer as to how he did it and why he did it that way and not another.

God gave us brains and an enquiring mind, it is meant to be used. We are supposed to learn the how's and whys of everything. Just because one can recognize that the builder and architect created this gigantic jigsaw puzzle, it doesn't mean we aren't supposed to go out and learn all we can. It is actually expected of us.

Keeping with the topic of the thread. If there was indeed a global flood, why should we reject the possible causes for it and simply say God did it? No, God wants us to find out how it happened and when and what the effects were. To say simply that it never happened because it is in the bible and thus it must be a myth is nonsense in my view.

Did it happen as the record says, or is it merely a case of distortion of the events long after they occurred? Did actually happen at all. We can study all these questions without the need of constantly questioning or denying his existence. W can even question the existence of God itself, but like any subject, it should be discussed in those specific discussions themselves, not being brought up at every turn in every discussion.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 04/01/2017 at 2:39 PM, Podo said:

Well a global flood isn't possible, so he clearly was wrong.

Newton's apparent contradiction of the great flood in the Bible being created by God seems to contradict his view that Quote " Newton saw a monotheistic God as the masterful creator whose existence could not be denied in the face of the grandeur of all creation."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Jor-el said:

My view is different, I can say that God did it, but that certainly doesn't give any answer as to how he did it and why he did it that way and not another.

God gave us brains and an enquiring mind, it is meant to be used. We are supposed to learn the how's and whys of everything. Just because one can recognize that the builder and architect created this gigantic jigsaw puzzle, it doesn't mean we aren't supposed to go out and learn all we can. It is actually expected of us.

Keeping with the topic of the thread. If there was indeed a global flood, why should we reject the possible causes for it and simply say God did it? No, God wants us to find out how it happened and when and what the effects were. To say simply that it never happened because it is in the bible and thus it must be a myth is nonsense in my view.

Your view is subjective in nature not an objective truth. It's a personal belief that colors everything you've written. You are also under an assumption due to your belief that "god" want's us to figure it out and that "god" gave us a brain, etc. These are subjective beliefs. If you want to discuss a global flood you'll need to do it from an objective stand point. One with facts. Not a religious one. 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

I still think it was localized ice age flooding that caused a lot of the stories. I've got no proof just speculation. 

80458-Im-Out-Leslie-Nielsen-Airplane-6Zf

"I'm just going to let the embers of a flame war slowly smoke as I walk out of the thread."

And it the most widely recognized one without doubt. Yet it doesn't fit all the evidence acquired from the varying myths around the world, most of whom have too many common or identical elements to be caused by localized events.

  1. Is there a favored family? 88%
  2. Were they forewarned? 66%
  3. Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%
  4. Is catastrophe only a flood? 95%
  5. Was flood global? 95%
  6. Is survival due to a boat? 70%
  7. Were animals also saved? 67%
  8. Did animals play any part? 73%
  9. Did survivors land on a mountain? 57%
  10. Was the geography local? 82%
  11. Were birds sent out? 35%
  12. Was the rainbow mentioned? 7%
  13. Did survivors offer a sacrifice? 13%
  14. Were specifically eight persons saved? 9%

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/nov/did-a-comet-cause-the-great-flood

Sixteen of the myths Masse examined describe when the flood storm occurred in terms of seasonal indicators. Fourteen myths are from Northern Hemisphere groups, and place the event in the spring. The one from the Southern Hemisphere places it in the fall--that is, spring north of the equator. Seven stories give the time in terms of lunar phase--six at the time of the full Moon, another two days later. Stories from Africa and South America say it happened at the time of a lunar eclipse, which can only occur when the Moon is full. A 4th century BC Babylonian account specifies a full Moon in late April or early May.

Chinese sources recount how the cosmic monster Gong Gong knocked over a pillar of heaven and caused flooding toward the end of the reign of Empress Nu Wa, around 2810 BC. The 3rd century BC Egyptian historian Manetho says there was an "immense disaster" (but doesn't say what kind) during the reign of the pharaoh Semerkhet, around 2800 BC.

The tomb of Semerkhet's successor, Qa'a, was built of poorly dried mud bricks and timbers showing unusual decay; the following pharaohs of the second dynasty relocated the royal cemetery to higher ground. Masse's analysis of astrological references in multiple myths from the Middle East, India and China--describing planetary conjunctions associated with the flood storm, whose actual times of occurrence can be reconstructed using contemporary astronomy software--leads him to conclude that the event happened on or about May 10, 2807 BC.

https://www.thoughtco.com/recent-cosmic-impacts-on-earth-170379

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Your view is subjective in nature not an objective truth. It's a personal belief that colors everything you've written. You are also under an assumption due to your belief that "god" want's us to figure it out and that "god" gave us a brain, etc. These are subjective beliefs. If you want to discuss a global flood you'll need to do it from an objective stand point. One with facts. Not a religious one. 

Then you are in the wrong forum----

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Jor-el said:

Then you are in the wrong forum----

Yeah I get that a lot for your kind.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Yeah I get that a lot for your kind.

My kind, your kind..... that's why discussions on this board are a hassle, it seems some people have forgotten the art of debate....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Jor-el said:

My kind, your kind..... that's why discussions on this board are a hassle, it seems some people have forgotten the art of debate....

Depends on how you define debate. Most of the time with threads like this it's. "I'm right but I want your opinion (not really) so let's discuss." When it comes to believers vs. skeptics it's always that way. Very rarely is there ever a discussion. Plus the subject you're talking about can be had without playing the god card. From a history point of view rather than a theological one.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

Depends on how you define debate. Most of the time with threads like this it's. "I'm right but I want your opinion (not really) so let's discuss." When it comes to believers vs. skeptics it's always that way. Very rarely is there ever a discussion. Plus the subject you're talking about can be had without playing the god card. From a history point of view rather than a theological one.

Righto, so go for it, let's leave the god part out and discuss the topic, that is why I participated on this thread even though its on the S vs S board.

Edited by Jor-el
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Jor-el said:

Righto, so go for it, let's leave the god part out and discuss the topic, that is why I participated on this thread even though its on the S vsS board.

You could've put in the alternative history section as I feel that is a better place for it. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

You could've put in the alternative history section as I feel that is a better place for it. 

Except I didn't start the thread.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Jor-el said:

Except I didn't start the thread.

My bad. Still it should've been up there. I figure that since you're like 90% of the post it was yours. Meh.....have fun talking about waterworld.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, XenoFish said:

My bad. Still it should've been up there. I figure that since you're like 90% of the post it was yours. Meh.....have fun talking about waterworld.

It's a subject I like among others.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Jor-el said:

believe you are incorrect, proof is not available, evidence is available that supports both conclusions. A hypothesis is a theory that attempts to correlate all the known evidence or data and to come up with an explanation creating a model.

Well you're wrong, there is no evidence of any deities.

13 hours ago, Jor-el said:

The relationship is unequivocal I would say. Besides it isn't just me saying it.

http://www.mesopotamiangods.com/ea-enki-nudimmud-khnemu-ptah-poseidon-oannes-overview/

Yeah, a site talking about alien gods and the planet Nibiru.. I gather you're a proponent of Sitchin's ancient alien nonsense.

Excellent job trying not to derail the thread. 

Edited by Rlyeh
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Jor-el said:

Yet it doesn't fit all the evidence acquired from the varying myths around the world, most of whom have too many common or identical elements to be caused by localized events.

I tend to think there are by definition some inherent issues in identifying elements in myths that we can call actual 'evidence'.  I thought the biblical flood was caused by rain, not tsunamis.

Quote
  1. Is there a favored family? 88%
  2. Were they forewarned? 66%
  3. Is flood due to wickedness of man? 66%

This list doesn't seem to have much to do with the idea of localized flooding.  It shows some commonalities (66% isn't exactly overwhelming by the way) between flood myths at best, but the idea that there was a favored family would seem to only be evidence of some kind of common god communicating the same message to multiple cultures, and is only indirectly related to a flood.  I'm a little lost on your position, if you are arguing for one.  You've talked about the comet strikes and megatsunamis, which would be an argument that there was a large scale flood, and maybe that's where these flood myths come from. On the other hand, and maybe it's just because you are talking about multiple topics at once, I think you are maybe also arguing that God had something to do with a global flood, as evidenced by common features in the flood myths.

Quote

God gave us brains and an enquiring mind, it is meant to be used. We are supposed to learn the how's and whys of everything. Just because one can recognize that the builder and architect created this gigantic jigsaw puzzle, it doesn't mean we aren't supposed to go out and learn all we can. It is actually expected of us.

On the other hand God gave us genitalia and libidos also, but I've never taken his message concerning that as simply 'it's meant to be used', quite the opposite.  Just curious, is there something in the Bible that is leading you to believe God expects us to go out and learn all we can about creation?  The overall message I got from the Bible is not, 'learn all you can about the creation as it will better allow you to care for each other' or something like that, it's instead, 'God will take care of everything' and 'your relationship with God is all that matters'.  I don't know if it's in the Bible, but I hear a lot of Christians say that they 'are not of this world', which doesn't seem very congruent with the idea of 'I expect you to learn all you can about this world anyway'.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.