The Instigator
theta_pinch
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
Elenchus123
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Noah's ark was real

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
theta_pinch
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/7/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 795 times Debate No: 43552
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (16)
Votes (1)

 

theta_pinch

Con

burden of proof is shared.
round1 acceptance
round2 opening arguments
Round3 rebuttals to round 2
round4 conclusion/rebuttal to round 3 if desired
Elenchus123

Pro

Acceptance--->|Hello, I'll be happy to listen to your proposition.|
I'm fairly confident on the opposing side of this fiasco due to philosophical reasoning's and factual scientific data that is in contrast to the criteria one would have to fall under to to take such a faithful leap.( Ex- A boat that supposedly held all of the speices known to earth which is 8.7 million and probably a larger number during the supposed time period that this boat was created, Planet earth being 4.5 billion years not 6,000 years, the fact that we evolved from tiny single celled organisms and then into monkeys and was not created in gods image unless he is a cellular being. A philosophical moral paradox that may get you questioning gods almighty moral and logic is as follows, Why do you suppose god would send anyone to hell if they fell under the cultural tug of another society and adopted a different belief system? That would mean that "God", This angry fellow in the sky, is basically damning the innocent to hell because they've been taught to believe a particular ideology that they are set in mainly because most of these religions threaten divine punishment if you worship false a Omniscient creator or prophets which as you could imagine would lock them into so-called (False truth) and therefore determine them to be sent into the perils of hell at even the young age of a child... Ouch.... He doesnt sound very all knowing and compassionate to me... If you were born into a islamic family you'd be islamic, if you were born unto a christian family you'd be christian, if you were born into a jewish family you'd be a jew, so on and so forth.. Assuming you're a christian by the way, I think the ark story is unique to that group. But... Your claim for this "massive" boat was made so i must hear it.
Debate Round No. 1
theta_pinch

Con

Point 1
Number of animals set on ark: about 6.5 million different species (not including extinct animals)-http://www.sciencedaily.com...
Volume of the ark: 39,366 cubic meters-http://www.metrum.org...
Can the ark hold 6.5 million animals? Answer: No

Point 2
Say the ark can hold that many animals; where's the food? The ark was afloat for 10 months so there is no way Noah could have both gotten the animals in AND the food.-http://www.ask.com...

Point 3
There is no way terrestrial animals could get to the ark from different continents and islands.

CONCLUSION
Too many impossibilities to be true.
Elenchus123

Pro

Elenchus123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
theta_pinch

Con

extend all arguments.
Elenchus123

Pro

Elenchus123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
theta_pinch

Con

extend all arguments.
Elenchus123

Pro

Elenchus123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
theta_pinch

Con

CONCLUSION
Vote CON!
Elenchus123

Pro

Elenchus123 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by michaelperry13 3 years ago
michaelperry13
You're very self righteous. Pick a harder debate and see what happens, theta.
Posted by michaelperry13 3 years ago
michaelperry13
1st:
As the instigator you really should take the pro side.
2nd:
On what planet is 40 days and 40 nights ten months?
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Yes there probably was a large flood in Mesopotamia, but most people actually seem to think it was a world-wide flood(since 45% of America is young earth creationist and they claim a world wide flood explains geological formations. For example they claim the flood is the reason the earth is only 6000 years old, but we find fossils of animals in different layers of sediment.)
Posted by FluffyCactus 3 years ago
FluffyCactus
"Also because it is so annoying how they think things that are impossible are true"
If could, for a mere moment, take the position of someone I deeply respect, who happens to be a Christian.
The Christian Scriptures have to be read within context, historically and traditionally. Many ignorant Christians may take the 'Noah' story as being literal (actually happened exactly as translated in english). However, many Christians also take the story to be a historical but predominantly spiritual event.
In defense of the first. Some Christians would not say that one pair of EVERY animal was within the boat. As has been noted, there are hundreds of thousands of species to be covered. One commonly used example for the impossibility of the story is the Elephant, which eats a lot (where is all the food?). Many Christians argue that, based on the historical, cultural, and linguistic context of the story, the animals to which genesis refers are those limited to Mesopotamia. This is for reasons too numerous to recount. If we speak about a flood that only covered this small portion of the world, then the Ark story seems to be feasible, as animal populations would only be required to repopulate the areas of mesopotamia, not the world. Therefore, no penguins, elephants, or otherwise were on the Ark. So says the educated believing Christian.
Further, the story is more for spiritual purpose than for historical. It shows that the world, and the human person, desolates themselves in sin. In spite of this, God baptizes the world, and us, in water to cleanse us of this evil. Traditional Christianity talked this way about the flood. Evangelical, NECESSARILY literal, interpretations of the flood story are a recent phenomena beginning in the late 18th century.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
Also because it is so annoying how they think things that are impossible are true.
Posted by FluffyCactus 3 years ago
FluffyCactus
"because its fun totally destroying what they thought was true."
This is what Plato warned us about so long ago... using debate, rhetoric, sophistry, or philosophy as means to destroy a person and insult their intelligence. This, sir, is a reprehensible reason to debate and is an insult to the art and practice.

Further, as one who has no dog in the fight, I observe the following flaw: one cannot presume A) what the author of genesis means by 'image of God', and B) make a moral judgment on the actions of an omnipotent, omniscient, *compassionate* creator, especially when using today's standards of morality, which vastly misrepresent the "biblical" narrative ad populum.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
because its fun totally destroying what they thought was true.
Posted by missmedic 3 years ago
missmedic
So god drowned all his children, and covered the earth with water for a year. One elephant eats about 100 tons of food in a year. All plant life would die off being under water that long. So what did they eat? The very simplest of math proves that Noah, like his boat is full of it. Why do intelligent people argue with these fools.
Posted by theta_pinch 3 years ago
theta_pinch
There are about 6.5 million terrestrial animals not counting those that are extinct. Noah needs several pairs of each animal; there is no possible way to fit that many animals in.
Posted by saxman 3 years ago
saxman
Well, when you said there was 8.7 millions species, i believe you are wrong. Now every species not yet extinct was, in this story, on the ark, there was not 8.7 million. Heres why. There are many ant species, but that is variation. In sexual reproduction, or meiosis, as it is called, cellos variate form the parent cell. That is why some people have blonde hair and blue eyes, as opposed to back hair and brown eyes. So there would be the "stem" species, meaning the possible species necessary for all the different kinds of animals we need today. And the fish did not need the ark either. The flood has tons of scientific evidence. Look at mount saint helens. The landscape was radically changed, by fast running water. and the moss population at mount saint helens regrew rapidly, until it was almost at its original population. An animal population can regrow quickly form small numbers. And as for the "compassionate" side of the argument, I this website won't let me write enough words. In short, it was we who sinned. We separated ourselves and we got us into this mess. It has taken years to learn and even scratch the surface of understanding the relationship between God and us. One thing is that, God cannot Contradict Himself. What people want him to do, sometimes, it would be a contradiction to do. We don't even know if having a perfect world was apart of His original plan. And on being made in His image, it is meant to be his spiritual image. And on being the part of being the youngest of children, in the bible, it is said that a child is not mature until he is 13. So many believe that children are considered innocent of the world. Jesus said let the children comet to me. As i am running our of characters, i will say one last thing. Evidence for Creation is very strong. look of "Acts of Facts" for some info. If you look at the fossil record, phenomena like Mount Saint Helens, or even the lack of dust on the moon, the evidence is there.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
theta_pinchElenchus123Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit