For those that accept the Bible as God's word and believe in God no tangible proof is necessary and to those that don't believe no amount of proof will ever be enough.

After death, upon passing from this realm (the Physical) into the next realm (The Spiritual) those questions will definitely be answered. Rest assured that very few if any atheist or agnostics will make that transition without wondering, in those last seconds, about their life long decisions that they have made and the "what-ifs" cross their mind for a brief last moment in time.

The saddest thing is though that the excuse that they never had a chance or opportunity to make a choice will be removed.
ah yes... because we ALL know how reliable The SUN is. it's right up there the weekly world news, the paper that found a WWII bomber on the moon.

i'm not saying anything about the ark, here.
i'm saying that if the sun told us that rain was wet, i'd have to take samples before i believe it.
quote:
Originally posted by thomaswayne0907:
physically impossible for 2 of EVERY animal to fit on there.


The only possible way that Noah's Ark, or any vessel could have saved "every animal" would be in the case of a limited flood that miraculously covered only that portion of the earth occupied by the evil men and women that were to be destroyed by the flood. The saved animals would be only those found within that relatively small part of the earth. But the hard-line conservatives will not accept that. Thus, the burden lies with them to show how New World (North American and South and Central American) animals made it to the ark. I have not found anyone who could explain that except by claiming that God made it happen miraculously.

If God needed to destroy sinful mankind, saving righteous Noah, why would He have had to flood the entire earth, since in the time Noah lived, presumably the human race occupied a very limited territory?

And, by the way, I don't buy into the Usher Chronology, so I do not accept the 4,800 year datum as the time of Noah.

Another dilemma for the literalists: If the earth was entirely flooded, was it a freshwater flood or a saltwater flood. If it was the former, then the saltwater-dependent species would have died out during the flood. If it was the latter, then the freshwater species would have all perished. My limited flood theory does not have to worry about such things.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by thomaswayne0907:
physically impossible for 2 of EVERY animal to fit on there.


The only possible way that Noah's Ark, or any vessel could have saved "every animal" would be in the case of a limited flood that miraculously covered only that portion of the earth occupied by the evil men and women that were to be destroyed by the flood. The saved animals would be only those found within that relatively small part of the earth. But the hard-line conservatives will not accept that. Thus, the burden lies with them to show how New World (North American and South and Central American) animals made it to the ark. I have not found anyone who could explain that except by claiming that God made it happen miraculously.

If God needed to destroy sinful mankind, saving righteous Noah, why would He have had to flood the entire earth, since in the time Noah lived, presumably the human race occupied a very limited territory?

And, by the way, I don't buy into the Usher Chronology, so I do not accept the 4,800 year datum as the time of Noah.

Another dilemma for the literalists: If the earth was entirely flooded, was it a freshwater flood or a saltwater flood. If it was the former, then the saltwater-dependent species would have died out during the flood. If it was the latter, then the freshwater species would have all perished. My limited flood theory does not have to worry about such things.



While your points as well as the initial questions/speculations are well put and founded the simple answer would be thus. IF this is Noah's Ark and you accept that it was GOD that forwarned Noah and gave him foresight and instructions as to how to build the ark then God would have figured out all those impossibilities that are impossible to man and that would have been taken care of. For those that believe in God they know God works miracles and would have no problem taking care of those things. For those who don't believe in God then it really doesn't matter does it for none of this existed or is all fables anyway.
personally, I feel that anybody who believes this stuff suffers from a mental defect and should be barred from public office, that would include so called public "servants".. I don't want anybody who believes in these fairy tales in a position of authority over me whatsoever.. They can't be trusted
quote:
Originally posted by The Cold Hard Truth:
personally, I feel that anybody who believes this stuff suffers from a mental defect and should be barred from public office, that would include so called public "servants".. I don't want anybody who believes in these fairy tales in a position of authority over me whatsoever.. They can't be trusted


Interesting comment, seeing that most of the men who wrote the constitution and served in offices in the past believed this so called "fairy tale". My suggestion is you get you a copy of Haley's Bible Handbook and look at the flood archaeology, it's numerous.
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by thomaswayne0907:
physically impossible for 2 of EVERY animal to fit on there.


The only possible way that Noah's Ark, or any vessel could have saved "every animal" would be in the case of a limited flood that miraculously covered only that portion of the earth occupied by the evil men and women that were to be destroyed by the flood. The saved animals would be only those found within that relatively small part of the earth. But the hard-line conservatives will not accept that. Thus, the burden lies with them to show how New World (North American and South and Central American) animals made it to the ark. I have not found anyone who could explain that except by claiming that God made it happen miraculously.

If God needed to destroy sinful mankind, saving righteous Noah, why would He have had to flood the entire earth, since in the time Noah lived, presumably the human race occupied a very limited territory?

And, by the way, I don't buy into the Usher Chronology, so I do not accept the 4,800 year datum as the time of Noah.

Another dilemma for the literalists: If the earth was entirely flooded, was it a freshwater flood or a saltwater flood. If it was the former, then the saltwater-dependent species would have died out during the flood. If it was the latter, then the freshwater species would have all perished. My limited flood theory does not have to worry about such things.



While your points as well as the initial questions/speculations are well put and founded the simple answer would be thus. IF this is Noah's Ark and you accept that it was GOD that forwarned Noah and gave him foresight and instructions as to how to build the ark then God would have figured out all those impossibilities that are impossible to man and that would have been taken care of. For those that believe in God they know God works miracles and would have no problem taking care of those things. For those who don't believe in God then it really doesn't matter does it for none of this existed or is all fables anyway.


Granted, God, being God, could have done anything He wanted insofar as preserving life during the Flood.

But the Biblical acount says nothing at all about God employing any miraculous means for this puprose. The story of the ark posits the construction of a rescue ship presumably of a capacity adequate to stow 7 pairs of each kind of clean animal and 2 pairs of each kind of unclean animal. One would presume that fish and other aquatic species would be able to take care of themselves, since they were adapted to living in water and a flood would be a "so what?" to them.

In other Biblical accounts where the hand of God has moved miraculously and powerfully, the Biblical record makes it clear that this is the case, and indeed the creation of the Flood is a miraculous and powerful thing. But the miracle was the Flood itself. The scriptural record nowhere makes or implies any claim that God supernaturally made room for more animals than an ark of the size described could physically accomodate.
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by gbrk:
quote:
Originally posted by beternU:
quote:
Originally posted by thomaswayne0907:
physically impossible for 2 of EVERY animal to fit on there.


The only possible way that Noah's Ark, or any vessel could have saved "every animal" would be in the case of a limited flood that miraculously covered only that portion of the earth occupied by the evil men and women that were to be destroyed by the flood. The saved animals would be only those found within that relatively small part of the earth. But the hard-line conservatives will not accept that. Thus, the burden lies with them to show how New World (North American and South and Central American) animals made it to the ark. I have not found anyone who could explain that except by claiming that God made it happen miraculously.

If God needed to destroy sinful mankind, saving righteous Noah, why would He have had to flood the entire earth, since in the time Noah lived, presumably the human race occupied a very limited territory?

And, by the way, I don't buy into the Usher Chronology, so I do not accept the 4,800 year datum as the time of Noah.

Another dilemma for the literalists: If the earth was entirely flooded, was it a freshwater flood or a saltwater flood. If it was the former, then the saltwater-dependent species would have died out during the flood. If it was the latter, then the freshwater species would have all perished. My limited flood theory does not have to worry about such things.



While your points as well as the initial questions/speculations are well put and founded the simple answer would be thus. IF this is Noah's Ark and you accept that it was GOD that forwarned Noah and gave him foresight and instructions as to how to build the ark then God would have figured out all those impossibilities that are impossible to man and that would have been taken care of. For those that believe in God they know God works miracles and would have no problem taking care of those things. For those who don't believe in God then it really doesn't matter does it for none of this existed or is all fables anyway.


Granted, God, being God, could have done anything He wanted insofar as preserving life during the Flood.

But the Biblical acount says nothing at all about God employing any miraculous means for this puprose. The story of the ark posits the construction of a rescue ship presumably of a capacity adequate to stow 7 pairs of each kind of clean animal and 2 pairs of each kind of unclean animal. One would presume that fish and other aquatic species would be able to take care of themselves, since they were adapted to living in water and a flood would be a "so what?" to them.

In other Biblical accounts where the hand of God has moved miraculously and powerfully, the Biblical record makes it clear that this is the case, and indeed the creation of the Flood is a miraculous and powerful thing. But the miracle was the Flood itself. The scriptural record nowhere makes or implies any claim that God supernaturally made room for more animals than an ark of the size described could physically accomodate.

Bunk beds?
quote:
Originally posted by The Cold Hard Truth:
uh-huh.. and how did they get all over the world where animals are unique to their continents?
It amazes me that people can take myth as fact..

Here ya go Noahs ark believers

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v...ture=player_embedded


The theory of Pangaea (which basically states that the continents were all connected forming one big "supercontinent") is probably true. Before Noah's flood, all of the land masses on earth were all joined to form one continent. This would eliminate the idea that animals would have to cross oceans to reach the ark.

If all of the animals lived on one continent, the environment and climate was probably consistent throughout the entire land. Therefore, animals would not adapt to their different climates because there was only one "superclimate." Any animals in existence would have already been adapted to their climate. Therefore, without the need for adaption, many less species of animals would have been in existence.

In addition, the story of Noah's flood explains the origin of tectonic plates. "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened." (Genesis 7:11 KJV) The "fountains of the great deep" refers to the water beneath the crust of the earth. The LORD caused these waters to burst forth from underneath, cracking and breaking the earth's crust and creating the tectonic plates. Thus, after the flood, the continents separated and all the animals of the earth were divided. Then, as climates changed due to the new location of the continents, the animals changed to adapt. This is called horizontal evolution; evolution within one class of animal.

YES, I copied and pasted this! Makes lots of sense to me.

Add Reply

Likes (0)
Post

×
×
×
×