The Instigator
abelsmack
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
1970vu
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

The legend of Noah's Ark is a historical event.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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...
abelsmack
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 622 times Debate No: 42825
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)

 

abelsmack

Con

No archaeological evidence exist of a simultaneous and catastrophic flood event. Also the event cannot be proven plausible with current understanding of meteorology, zoology/biology, or the shipping material and technology of the era. if you feel otherwise please accept the challenge. Biblical and other religious cites are acceptable but must be qualified by an outside source that is not affiliated to a religious organization. Be prepared to offer specifics like how many "kinds" of animals were on board. Both parties may propose new questions to the other side related to the debate every round if they have provided proper answers to previous questions.

http://www.talkorigins.org...

https://www.youtube.com...
1970vu

Pro

I accept this debate. I will prove that multiple small floods happened. Thus therefore Noah's ark is a historical event. I will not use verses from the Bible.
Debate Round No. 1
abelsmack

Con

Thank you for accepting my challenge.

Your debate strategy is interesting.

Please be sure that the several floods can be tied to Noah. I don't see the point of proving that there were floods after Noah died.

Also make sure it isn't the same story twice. For example if there is a Noah story in Hebrew and a Noah story in Arabic, it is still one story just translated. Both stories translated to English would look the same, like if harry potter is translated to Chinese and French it's still ONE story. If there is different but enhancing information then it is acceptable and counts as the same story with new information. That is what I suspect you may have.

Good luck and let's have a great debate!
1970vu

Pro

1970vu forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
abelsmack

Con

My opponent has forfeited the run. I will allow him to use the upcoming one to place an argument.
1970vu

Pro

1970vu forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
abelsmack

Con

My opponent has apparently forfeited please vote for me.
1970vu

Pro

I apologize for my forfeit.
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by abelsmack 3 years ago
abelsmack
I also believe there likely was an event that was a massive, but local, flood that the story is likely based on. The issue I have is that a large segment of the population believes that Genesis is exactly how it happened.

"An ABC News poll released Sunday found that 61 percent of Americans believe the account of creation in the Bible"s book of Genesis is "literally true" rather than a story meant as a 'lesson.' "

Read more: http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Follow us: @washtimes on Twitter
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
If I were to take this debate I would argue for a large scale geologic and atmospheric event causing a local flood of Noah's world. I suspect he lived in a rift valley
Posted by abelsmack 3 years ago
abelsmack
The cut off. The comment I was making is that there are many home school children taught that GENESIS IS history.

The opponent can also argue that it is possible COULD have happened. Like it is possible to repopulate the earth with just single pairs of animals that fit in the Titanic or there might is enough water available to flood earth. I simply argue that a boat built at that time wouldn't even be seaworthy based on the dimensions given in Genesis. You can also construct a case based on circumstantial evidence. As long as it is plausible or verifiable it's all good.
Posted by abelsmack 3 years ago
abelsmack
"I am interested to know what kind of written sources you expect from such an ancient event."

You can use ANY source you have written at any time, but if there was a flood on that level there must be physical evidence. The source can be as modern as it gets as long as it can be used to verify that the flood happened, for example if there is an archaeological team that finds the remains of a boat fitting the description of the ark is acceptable. I just want a non-religious source to corroborate the claims.

A Japanese archaeologist who is Shinto Buddhist should come up with evidence of a world wide flood if it happened, religious claims are acceptable but also include one non-religious authority that agrees with the claim. I just don't to hear claims like the ark had 2 T-Rexes in there quoted from Answers In Genesis and they get their information from the bible or through revelation.

There have also been several archaeological hoaxes submitted by religious groups later revealed that local town people created the hoax to get tourism, secular archaeologist were skeptical from the onset.

"If the flood was local, it is unlikely that the surrounding tribes or peoples would bother to keep historical records of yet another extinct people group."

If the flood was local then it makes the biblical account false, which means that there IS no evidence it happened as described, that's my point. There would only be survivors and we all would have the same initial heritage otherwise. Also we DO preserve written records of extinct people. Many early rulers would have libraries of written material and would be studied and translated by scribes e.g. the Rosetta Stone. I also suspect that the flood was a dramatic local event the was later embellished to the point we see in Noah's story, however, there are millions who take it as a literal and educate their children as such. The Creation Museum in Kentucky gets a lot of home school kids that get taught that Genesis IS hi
Posted by InVinoVeritas 3 years ago
InVinoVeritas
"Legend" is a troubling word to use in the resolution.
Posted by gordonjames 3 years ago
gordonjames
I'm interested in the conditions you put on the debate.

Biblical and other religious cites are acceptable but must be qualified by an outside source that is not affiliated to a religious organization.

I am interested to know what kind of written sources you expect from such an ancient event.

If the flood was global, it is unlikely that written records survived. If it was later written from the oral tradition of the descendants there is little precedent for works not deemed religious to be preserved since the story was also preserved in what they may have believed were more important works.

If the flood was local, it is unlikely that the surrounding tribes or peoples would bother to keep historical records of yet another extinct people group.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
abelsmack1970vuTied
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: FF. Nice apology.