Re: Which religion atheists destest most?
-
Once again: **I am not an atheist. **Just because I question something doesn’t mean I am opposed to it, and your attitude is incredibly insulting, especially since you are a mod and are supposed to foster discussion. It’s quite shameful.
-
It clearly implies all creatures, since the *entire Earth *was supposedly flooded, which in itself is unbelievable since we have records from civilizations at the time that do not have any record of such a calamity (really, think about it, if the whole world was flooded, wouldn’t someone, somewhere, have written about it?). What was the point of taking animals on board? To save them. Otherwise they would have died. Since we have millions of animals today, there must have been two of each animal that exists today, on this ark. The size of such a ship would have to be immense. That, is what’s a logical inconsistency.
-
The flood myth is older than Abrahamic religions. Read the story of Gilgamesh from Sumeria, which originates around 7,000 BC. It is likely that the story is much older, from about 10,000 BC when the ice age first ended. That would have resulted in “flooding” as sea levels rose.
-
And that belief in miracles is precisely my point. You can claim anything and if someone says that makes no sense, just imply that they don’t believe in miracles so they can’t be helped. If that’s your argument then we really have nothing more to say do we? I believe in a giant spaghetti monster orbiting Jupiter. I can’t prove it but you can’t disprove it either. Also, you don’t believe me because you don’t have faith. See how that works? To an atheist, there is no difference between the spaghetti monster and religious texts. Unless they have seen it, they don’t consider it fact. That is not an unreasonable position.
Oh and I should repeat it once again since you seem to have trouble with this: **I am not an atheist. **