Converts

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

24 minutes ago, Dan56 said:

 

Well, to me its just God assuring Noah that He will not forget the covenant that He just made. The rainbow was a token of that covenant, it represented a promise that would never escape God's remembrance. Perhaps it wasn't written as, "man will see it and remember" because that statement would not have been true, many men don't recall the covenant no matter how many rainbows they see? But clearly, It doesn't imply that an omniscient God is a forgetful moron who needed to tie a bow in the sky to remember a covenant, but rather a sign of reassurance of a promise that God would not renege on His word and would not flood the earth again. To me, "I will remember" is a factual statement, it doesn't imply that God is forgetful. 

 

 

 

That's not what it says.  The words are what they are.  Not what you want them to be.

 

 

 

 

 

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Well, that's a step in the right direction ...  The flood was regional, not God

 

 

I don't recall speculating about Mt Hermon per se? I suspect the ark landed somewhere in the northern foothills of the Tarim Basin. After the flood, Noah may have traveled near Pamir (Eden) when he migrated to UR (southern Iraq), but I don't think Pamir was a plateau 4000 years ago.

I simply believe it was a limited flood that possibly occurred in the Tarim Basin or eastern Turkestan region. If so, the ark didn't leave that area and likely landed in the northern foothills of the basin. So no, Noah never 'sailed' over Pakistan to get to Mt Ararat in Turkey. The "Mountains of Ararat" in Genesis 8:4 clearly refers to a general region, not a specific mountain. There was no Mount Ararat in biblical times.

 

This site has the map that I previously referred to; http://www.depodio.com/noah.htm

It still means sailing over the Himalayas and the Afghanistan mountain ranges to get anywhere near the mountains of Ararat. Any flood that covered these mountains had to be worldwide. 

[Dan56]

2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

That's not what it says.  The words are what they are.  Not what you want them to be.

 

You just don't have a grasp of biblical expression. The bow was in recognition of the covenant, it was to mark the occasion with a sign, which would forever after bring the covenant into remembrance. Consider the previous verse, "I will remember My covenant, which is between me and you" (Genesis 9:15). Those words are point blank, God saying "I will remember" and not that He needs a reminder. There are other passages where God ask us to bring things to His remembrance in prayer (Isaiah 43:26), but that again is for our sake, and not because we worship an absent minded God.

 

2 hours ago, Pete said:

It still means sailing over the Himalayas and the Afghanistan mountain ranges to get anywhere near the mountains of Ararat. Any flood that covered these mountains had to be worldwide. 

 

We don't know exactly what direction the ark went, Ararat just means Armenia.. For that matter, no one is sure where the ark originated, it could have flowed West from Persia and settled in the Turkey/Armenian foot hills from the backside? Its all speculation, but my point was that the deluge was regional and the high mountains weren't completely under water, I believe it just covered about 15 cubits (22 feet) of the tallest mountains (Genesis 7:20). But I wasn't there, so its just one of many theories, all I know is that no life would have survived the aftermath of a world-wide flood. "The geology of the pre-flood earth was presumably much different than we see today since the Bible states that after the flood, the mountains rose up and the valleys of the seas sank down...the pre-flood mountains were much lower than we see today which is borne out by flood models like the Hydroplate"  Theory by Dr Walt Brown.  

[Key]

5 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Well, to me its just God assuring Noah that He will not forget the covenant that He just made. The rainbow was a token of that covenant, it represented a promise that would never escape God's remembrance. Perhaps it wasn't written as, "man will see it and remember" because that statement would not have been true, many men don't recall the covenant no matter how many rainbows they see? But clearly, It doesn't imply that an omniscient God is a forgetful moron who needed to tie a bow in the sky to remember a covenant, but rather a sign of reassurance of a promise that God would not renege on His word and would not flood the earth again. To me, "I will remember" is a factual statement, it doesn't imply that God is forgetful. 

But that's just it, Dan. It doesn't just say, "I will remember". It specifically states, "I will see it and remember." Btw, I wouldn't say a forgetful anyone is a moron without them demonstrating the fact first.

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

You just don't have a grasp of biblical expression. The bow was in recognition of the covenant, it was to mark the occasion with a sign, which would forever after bring the covenant into remembrance. Consider the previous verse, "I will remember My covenant, which is between me and you" (Genesis 9:15). Those words are point blank, God saying "I will remember" and not that He needs a reminder. There are other passages where God ask us to bring things to His remembrance in prayer (Isaiah 43:26), but that again is for our sake, and not because we worship an absent minded God.

 

 

We don't know exactly what direction the ark went, Ararat just means Armenia.. For that matter, no one is sure where the ark originated, it could have flowed West from Persia and settled in the Turkey/Armenian foot hills from the backside? Its all speculation, but my point was that the deluge was regional and the high mountains weren't completely under water, I believe it just covered about 15 cubits (22 feet) of the tallest mountains (Genesis 7:20). But I wasn't there, so its just one of many theories, all I know is that no life would have survived the aftermath of a world-wide flood. "The geology of the pre-flood earth was presumably much different than we see today since the Bible states that after the flood, the mountains rose up and the valleys of the seas sank down...the pre-flood mountains were much lower than we see today which is borne out by flood models like the Hydroplate"  Theory by Dr Walt Brown.  

Look  Dan it seems to me one minute your saying the bible is accurate and then it can mean just about anything.  Not something to put much trust in It, it seems to me. Anyway this is a no religion section and I came here not to talk about religion. It bores me nowadays and  I really don't care what the bronze book of edited oddments has to say. It matters little to me. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Pete

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

Look  Dan it seems to me one minute your saying the bible is accurate and then it can mean just about anything.  Not something to put much trust in It, it seems to me. Anyway this is a no religion section and I came here not to talk about religion. It bores me nowadays and  I really don't care what the bronze book of edited oddments has to say. It matters little to me. 

 

 

Such is the faith driven mind.  You and I can read the Bible -- and know what it says.  Dan reads the Bible -- and believes that he knows what it means.  It's way too late to bring logic into this.  Reason will not prevail.  Faith and Belief over all.  Dan will not compromise.  He can't.  You know.  All in or all out.  Everything or nothing.  No nuances.  No distinctions.  Since he doesn't want to join us in the Lake of Fire -- that's it.

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

2 hours ago, Key said:

But that's just it, Dan. It doesn't just say, "I will remember". It specifically states, "I will see it and remember." Btw, I wouldn't say a forgetful anyone is a moron without them demonstrating the fact first.

 

 

 

I missed that.     

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

3 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

You just don't have a grasp of biblical expression. The bow was in recognition of the covenant, it was to mark the occasion with a sign, which would forever after bring the covenant into remembrance. Consider the previous verse, "I will remember My covenant, which is between me and you" (Genesis 9:15). Those words are point blank, God saying "I will remember" and not that He needs a reminder. There are other passages where God ask us to bring things to His remembrance in prayer (Isaiah 43:26), but that again is for our sake, and not because we worship an absent minded God.

 

 

We don't know exactly what direction the ark went, Ararat just means Armenia.. For that matter, no one is sure where the ark originated, it could have flowed West from Persia and settled in the Turkey/Armenian foot hills from the backside? Its all speculation, but my point was that the deluge was regional and the high mountains weren't completely under water, I believe it just covered about 15 cubits (22 feet) of the tallest mountains (Genesis 7:20). But I wasn't there, so its just one of many theories, all I know is that no life would have survived the aftermath of a world-wide flood. "The geology of the pre-flood earth was presumably much different than we see today since the Bible states that after the flood, the mountains rose up and the valleys of the seas sank down...the pre-flood mountains were much lower than we see today which is borne out by flood models like the Hydroplate"  Theory by Dr Walt Brown.  

 

Uh-huh     

 

I don't.          I don't worship any God at all.     

 

 

 

 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Jonathan H. B. Lobl

[Pete]

1 hour ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

Such is the faith driven mind.  You and I can read the Bible -- and know what it says.  Dan reads the Bible -- and believes that he knows what it means.  It's way too late to bring logic into this.  Reason will not prevail.  Faith and Belief over all.  Dan will not compromise.  He can't.  You know.  All in or all out.  Everything or nothing.  No nuances.  No distinctions.  Since he doesn't want to join us in the Lake of Fire -- that's it.

 

It's more than that Jonathan. Dan just does not get I don't give a damn about his views on religion. I just don't care. To me it's a nonsense and I wish he would leave this no religion section to "no religion ". Sorry if that sounds hard but I feel a need to spell it out. Call it apathy or call it I don't care. Whatever gets the message across. 

Edited December 17, 2019 by Pete

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

12 minutes ago, Pete said:

It's more than that Jonathan. Dan just does not get I don't give a damn about his views on religion. I just don't care. To me it's a nonsense and I wish he would leave this no religion section to "no religion ". Sorry if that sounds hard but I feel a need to spell it out. Call it apathy or call it I don't care. Whatever gets the message across. 

 

 

 

Welcome to the happy world of Apatheism.  I get it.     

 

There comes a time when we need the company of adults.     

 

 

[Dan56]

10 hours ago, Key said:

But that's just it, Dan. It doesn't just say, "I will remember". It specifically states, "I will see it and remember." Btw, I wouldn't say a forgetful anyone is a moron without them demonstrating the fact first.

 

Verse 16 says that; but its preceded by, "And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh."  (Genesis 9:15). So I'm not sure what the point is? Are you guys trying to prove that God is forgetful? Can you give me a specific instance in the bible that would indicate that God forgot something? Are you suggesting that "I will see it & remember" is an example of God not being omniscient? Do you really think God needs to see a rainbow in order to recall His covenant? That's kind of like me saying that you need to see the dog house you made for your dog in order to remember that you have a dog .. And my point was that God is not a forgetful moron precisely because no one has demonstrated it.

 

7 hours ago, Pete said:

Dan just does not get I don't give a damn about his views on religion. I just don't care. To me it's a nonsense and I wish he would leave this no religion section to "no religion ". Sorry if that sounds hard but I feel a need to spell it out.

 

You know, I didn't bring the "Flood" topic up, I was just responding to the comments of others about the flood. Even you chimed in with 4 flood post beginning with; "I don't believe in a biblical world wide flood and think the story of Noah is adopted from other religions." If you don't care, why make comments about the mountain ranges and all? I don't particularly care about your views on why you believe in nothing either, but I'm polite enough to respond to those who disparage what I believe.

 

And the person who started this 'Converts' thread wrote in the first post; "Most evangelical Faith's do a good enough job on their own because despite all the effort they put into it there is still no empirical evidence and it's no more than a belief coupled with an assertion and twisting arguments to suit their ministry." Sounds like a connotation introducing religion. Never-the-less, I'll leave you now to discuss religious converts in this nonreligious topic .

Edited December 18, 2019 by Dan56

[Pete]

Just a point. I said I don't want converts of any sort.  I want people who can think for themselves.  I am talking about feelings and not just religion. 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

6 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Verse 16 says that; but its preceded by, "And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh."  (Genesis 9:15). So I'm not sure what the point is? Are you guys trying to prove that God is forgetful? Can you give me a specific instance in the bible that would indicate that God forgot something? Are you suggesting that "I will see it & remember" is an example of God not being omniscient? Do you really think God needs to see a rainbow in order to recall His covenant? That's kind of like me saying that you need to see the dog house you made for your dog in order to remember that you have a dog .. And my point was that God is not a forgetful moron precisely because no one has demonstrated it.

 

 

You know, I didn't bring the "Flood" topic up, I was just responding to the comments of others about the flood. Even you chimed in with 4 flood post beginning with; "I don't believe in a biblical world wide flood and think the story of Noah is adopted from other religions." If you don't care, why make comments about the mountain ranges and all? I don't particularly care about your views on why you believe in nothing either, but I'm polite enough to respond to those who disparage what I believe.

 

And the person who started this 'Converts' thread wrote in the first post; "Most evangelical Faith's do a good enough job on their own because despite all the effort they put into it there is still no empirical evidence and it's no more than a belief coupled with an assertion and twisting arguments to suit their ministry." Sounds like a connotation introducing religion. Never-the-less, I'll leave you now to discuss religious converts in this nonreligious topic .

 

 

 

, "And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh."  (Genesis 9:15)

 

 

Thank you for pointing this out.  The flood was not local.  It was world wide.     

 

   

 

 

 

 

 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

8 hours ago, Dan56 said:

 

Verse 16 says that; but its preceded by, "And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh."  (Genesis 9:15). So I'm not sure what the point is? Are you guys trying to prove that God is forgetful? Can you give me a specific instance in the bible that would indicate that God forgot something? Are you suggesting that "I will see it & remember" is an example of God not being omniscient? Do you really think God needs to see a rainbow in order to recall His covenant? That's kind of like me saying that you need to see the dog house you made for your dog in order to remember that you have a dog .. And my point was that God is not a forgetful moron precisely because no one has demonstrated it.

 

 

You know, I didn't bring the "Flood" topic up, I was just responding to the comments of others about the flood. Even you chimed in with 4 flood post beginning with; "I don't believe in a biblical world wide flood and think the story of Noah is adopted from other religions." If you don't care, why make comments about the mountain ranges and all? I don't particularly care about your views on why you believe in nothing either, but I'm polite enough to respond to those who disparage what I believe.

 

And the person who started this 'Converts' thread wrote in the first post; "Most evangelical Faith's do a good enough job on their own because despite all the effort they put into it there is still no empirical evidence and it's no more than a belief coupled with an assertion and twisting arguments to suit their ministry." Sounds like a connotation introducing religion. Never-the-less, I'll leave you now to discuss religious converts in this nonreligious topic .

 

 

I don't particularly care about your views on why you believe in nothing either,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dan56]

2 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I don't particularly care about your views on why you believe in nothing either,

 

Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but its difficult to care about belief in nothing, because there's just nothing there to care about or comment on.  Agnosticism = zip, and Apatheism =

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Dan56 said:

 

Sorry if that hurt your feelings, but its difficult to care about belief in nothing, because there's just nothing there to care about or comment on.  Agnosticism = zip, and Apatheism =

 

 

 

I have wasted a lot of effort, trying to explain these distinctions to you.  I finally understand that you don't care at all, about any beliefs or understanding, except your own.  So, screw it.  I don't care that you don't understand the meaning of Atheism.  I don't care that you don't understand the meaning of Agnosticism.  I truly don't care that you don't understand Apatheism.  Every idea filters through your belief system.  I give up.     

 

 

 

 

 

[Pete]

44 minutes ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

 

 

 

I have wasted a lot of effort, trying to explain these distinctions to you.  I finally understand that you don't care at all, about any beliefs or understanding, except your own.  So, screw it.  I don't care that you don't understand the meaning of Atheism.  I don't care that you don't understand the meaning of Agnosticism.  I truly don't care that you don't understand Apatheism.  Every idea filters through your belief system.  I give up.     

 

 

 

 

 

None of us would even think about Dan 's belief if he did not pester us with it. I don't know why we even listen. 

[Jonathan H. B. Lobl]

1 hour ago, Pete said:

None of us would even think about Dan 's belief if he did not pester us with it. I don't know why we even listen. 

 

 

 

It is the fatal weakness of an Interfaith church.  Even narrow minded bigots -- who think the rest of us are headed for the Lake of Fire -- have a place here.  Fundamentalist churches can have a purity test.  We can't.  Interfaith means Interfaith.  We are Universal Life.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Dan56]

7 hours ago, Jonathan H. B. Lobl said:

I have wasted a lot of effort, trying to explain these distinctions to you.

 

It is the fatal weakness of an Interfaith church.  Even narrow minded bigots -- who think the rest of us are headed for the Lake of Fire -- have a place here.  Fundamentalist churches can have a purity test.  We can't.  Interfaith means Interfaith.  We are Universal Life.

 

I understand the definitions of Atheism, Agnosticism, and Apatheism.. One doesn't believe, one doesn't know, and the other doesn't know or care. Hardly difficult concepts to grasp, and none require any in-depth explanation or analysis. 

 

Varying beliefs are not a weakness of an interfaith church... Those who believe in the divine are not narrow minded just because they can't prove their faith to your satisfaction. And fundamentalist do try to abide by a set of standards, but we don't project those moral standards onto nonbelievers. Perhaps you have no purity test because you don't believe in anything that formally sets a core set of values? Yes, we are Interfaith, but what's your faith? You may embrace Universal Life, but simultaneously condemn the idea of everlasting life.

[Pete]

🤪🤪🤪🤪🤪 in the end interfaith or not, this section in about No religion.