Noah's Ark

This is cool...who needs Sunday School when we have ECCIE!

If you were to go to the New Testament your references would be different. Some believe that Mary Magdalene was Jesus' wife. Originally Posted by pyramider

yes, it would. which just goes to show how many different interpretations of ancient translated versions there are. and how much disagreement there is between the christian factions there are.

i'm still waiting for bojulay to tell us how his hooktard lifestyle does not conflict with his religious beliefs. 10 Hail Mary's? 20? what's it take, hypocrite?

This is cool...who needs Sunday School when we have ECCIE! Originally Posted by Prolongus

i hereby found the Church of Hooktardology. in the spirit (sic) of L Ron Hubbard, i will file for tax exempt status and charge you all zillions for my auditing classes. i will show you the true meaning of being a hooktard, as long as it makes me zillions of money.

i will buy a yacht and my Sea Org will look like this ..



and this ..



and this ..



and this ..








so you see my Church of Hooktardology will welcome Sea Org babes of all creeds and colors, and will show the light and the way to true spiritual freedom!

Join today Hooktards!

Detractors and self proclaimed debunkers, as with nearly all finds that have
a claim with biblical origin. Goes with the territory. Any find with biblical
claim always has people trying to discredit it.

Another amazing video showing the many biblical archaeological finds
that have been made.

Zertal published his amazing finds that have been ignored by the secular scientist.
Their Modus Operandi, either try and debunk, or when irrefutable evidence is presented, ignore. Originally Posted by bojulay

Since when have you or any other creationtist ever presented irrefutable evidence?

Point to the link.

Above, I asked you specific questions about what happened to vegetation and plant food as as result of the flood.

You ignored the questions because you have no answer to the blindingly obvious fallacy of the Ark fable.

come to me brother bojulay! the hypnotic eye of the Church of Hooktardology calls to you! come, my little lost sheep, join my flock!

I don't believe there was a world wide flood. The idea comes
from the bad translation of the hebrew word Erets translated
Earth in the english, when 1476 other times in the Bible it is
properly translated Land, speaking about a specific area
not the whole Earth.

With the proper translation understood, Noah took animals
onto the Ark that would be for his own use, and to repopulate
the area that was affected by the flood. The Land of Noah not
the Earth of Noah.

The bad translation has lead people that believe in creation
to try and defend some erroneous world wide flood event.
When properly understood the Bible doesn't even make
such a claim.

And gee golly the flood story actually makes sense when properly
understood.

A lot of the Bible was translated by the Futurist Frame of Reference.
They always look at everything as World Wide.

Sadly in the Christian community, just like with many things in the
Scientific Community, many people know this but don't want to
go against the Status Quo. Afraid of losing their jobs, reputations, etc.

Just like the silly Rapture story that is taught.

Western Futurist Theological Frame of Reference. Originally Posted by bojulay

I'm not a religious girl. My inclinations run more toward the pagan and dancing naked around a bonfire at midnight worshiping the full moon. (Or maybe having someone worship MY full moons. )

So forget the Ark and the Bible for a moment, or consider it, as many do, another type of loosely-based historical fantasy. However, hard to discount the fact that nearly every religion/mythology in ancient history from around the world and in unconnected cultures has some sort of flood myth. (See links to some of them at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flood_myth .)

There's also quite a bit of geological evidence, and we do know that vast stretches of land mass on Earth were once covered with ocean. Heck, I grew up in the California dessert, used to go out as a kid with my little rock hammer and dig up petrified wood and fossilized shells in the same stratum amidst the sand dunes.

Not that hard to believe that some cataclysmic event took place that has resonated with humanity through the aeons. Wait until the next meteor hits somewhere at sea big enough to set off giant tsunamis, or the big quake comes that triggers a chain reaction of the Ring of Fire seismic/volcanic zone circling the Pacific.

Btw, I'm founder of the Church of the Holy Chihuahua. Kiss my wagging tail.

I'm not a religious girl. My inclinations run more toward the pagan and dancing naked around a bonfire at midnight worshiping the full moon. (Or maybe having someone worship MY full moons. )


Btw, I'm founder of the Church of the Holy Chihuahua. Kiss my wagging tail.

Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

did i mention pagans are also welcome in the Church of Hooktardology?



nice gimmick sister Fancy! who could resist this ...

Yes, Brother Waco, hookers, doggies, and tacos will save the world.

Yes, Brother Waco, hookers, doggies, and tacos will save the world. Originally Posted by Fancyinheels

AMEN Sister!

Holy Tebow, you people are fucked up.

Holy Tebow, you people are fucked up. Originally Posted by pyramider

when the going gets tough, the tough go fucking.

the Church of Hooktardology is looking for misguided souls just like you!

come, brother, the Church of Hooktardology will make a real man outta you or you'll die trying.

The fallacy of junk DNA and Darwin of the gaps.

omg..this is serious fun reading..ya'll r crazay! i dig reading and hearing diff versions about history and things that may have happened way back before my first life started..

so what? so one person thought large amounts of DNA were non-functional? DNA IS complex bojulay, to think otherwise is stupid. Science proving DNA, basically all DNA does serve a function doesn't do a thing to prop up your Creationist argument.

Occam's razor states that among competing hypotheses, the hypothesis with the fewest assumptions should be selected. In other words, the simplest explanation is usually the correct one.

to you, that's the Hand of God. to me it's that DNA is complex and all of it serves a purpose.

i'll take the simple stance that DNA is complex, as you'd expect it to be. that video does nothing to advance Creationist views.

Since when have you or any other creationtist ever presented irrefutable evidence?

Point to the link.

Above, I asked you specific questions about what happened to vegetation and plant food as as result of the flood.

You ignored the questions because you have no answer to the blindingly obvious fallacy of the Ark fable. Originally Posted by ExNYer

Are you an idiot or what? In present day time- you have vegetation that is destroyed by various natural events: Drought, floods, pesticides, and they grow back you idiot.

Here are a few questions for you: [B]How did sex originate? Asexual reproduction gives up to twice as much reproductive success (‘fitness’) for the same resources as sexual reproduction, so how could the latter ever gain enough advantage to be selected? And how could mere physics and chemistry invent the complementary apparatuses needed at the same time (non-intelligent processes cannot plan for future coordination of male and female organs).
: who came first —a him or a her?
Which evolved first, male sex organs or female sex organs? Male sex organs are so different from female sex organs that neither could possibly have evolved from the other. Neither could either have evolved without the other! Think that through! Sexual reproduction could only have been successful if male and female organs fit one another and worked together at each stage from their very beginning. The only reasonable explanation is that both were created on purpose by an intelligent Creator.
If you take away asexual species and there's only a few- if evolution occurred - how could nearly every species living "mysteriously" have an opposite sex which happens to have the right apparatus to reproduce- hmmmm and how did early species know when and how to reproduce?


Science involves experimenting to figure out how things work; how they operate. Why is evolution, a theory about history, taught as if it is the same as this operational science? You cannot do experiments, or even observe what happened, in the past. Asked if evolution has been observed, Richard Dawkins said, “Evolution has been observed. It’s just that it hasn’t been observed while it’s happening.