Noah - Unsure

[westtexas]

I understand... lots of folks agree with ya.
For my self in my mind/heart Geneses is as real as John 3:16 ...

What happened to the "like button" to tell ya that ya done good Sister? Haha. Maybe it's on here somewhere but I don't see it. Anyway, you've got my "LIKE"

 

[reba]

thank you West i dont see it either.... it is just that simple to me

Added
I remember westtexas it is not in place at all the forums....

 

[westtexas]

I remember westtexas it is not in place at all the forums....

Why? We aint supposed to like something in A&T?

 

[reba]

1,209 post and you still ask?

 

[lowrab777]

A Liger is a huge cat that is a cross breed of a lion and a tiger

L.M.B.O. I love it

 

[lowrab777]

Maybe they stood on top of each other like those crazy circus critters

 

[lowrab777]

seriously though If God had the ability that God should have then he could have made them fit somehow,...... even if they slept piled on top of each other for the whole 40 days and nites and needed no food or water for that time.

 

[ezrider]

If I were to search the scriptures I am sure I could come up with a passage that would describe the foolishness displayed in this thread. You have chased after other doctrines, and then end up questioning the beliefs of one another; but to understand the words of Jesus, you have run far from. You take the phrase "as in the days of Noah" and then rush off to pursue a doctrine concerning Noah or who knows what else that comes forth from the imaginations of men, but you ignore what Jesus is telling you about his kingdom. As in the days of Noah is more parenthetical than definitive; forget Noah and forget the flood. If you have to understand anything about the flood, then know that it was the judgment of the Lord. If you have to understand anything about Noah, then know that he was saved; the rest is irrelevant. For as in the days of Bilbo Baggins, or perhaps Conan the Barbarian, the people did eat and drink, and they married and were given in marriage, and looked only at the things that pertain to this world until the day of judgement came upon them, and took them unawares. Though we are in the World, we are not of the World, that we should be caught so unaware. If there was a phrase from this passage that you should choose to consider in greater depth, then I would recommend the phrase "being married and given in marriage" and then contrast that to what Jesus said about the resurrection; For in the resurrection, there is neither marrying or giving in marriage, but you are as the angels in heaven.

 

[turnorburn]

kevinmaynard said:

They didn't all die is the problem with the flood story.

I'd be curious who taught you this..

tob

 

[kevinmaynard]

kevinmaynard said:

I'd be curious who taught you this..

tob

That is evidenced through through archaeology, and history. I actually know an archaeologist and read about it, and. Things were going on all over the world 4000- 5000 years ago. People were living in North America and South America building things. There were empires. People were in Europe, and Egypt etc. Understanding the truth isn't anti bible it is just what it is. There was no massive flood in North America or Australia at that time, and the people living there didn't suddenly die off.

I also, know a few geologists, and took several classes. There just isn't evidence for a world wide catastrophic flood 4000-5000 years ago that destroyed 99% of all life on earth.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

That is evidenced through through archaeology, and history. I actually know an archaeologist and read about it, and. Things were going on all over the world 4000- 5000 years ago. People were living in North America and South America building things. There were empires. People were in Europe, and Egypt etc. Understanding the truth isn't anti bible it is just what it is. There was no massive flood in North America or Australia at that time, and the people living there didn't suddenly die off.

I also, know a few geologists, and took several classes. There just isn't evidence for a world wide catastrophic flood 4000-5000 years ago that destroyed 99% of all life on earth.

Genesis 7:19;
"They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered".
If this is not literal, then what does it mean?

 

[turnorburn]

I have evidence that shows a world wide flood, every Christian I've known over 40 some years believe there was a world wide flood, some eastern religions believe a partial flood. Under your username it says Christian "yes" any particular denomination?

tob

 

[chessman]

Genesis 7:19;
"They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered".
If this is not literal, then what does it mean?

Are not the "mountains" on the Moon, Mars and Pluto "under the heavens" literally? Do you think those mountains were covered too?

Or as a figure of speech, could "under the heavens" mean something like horizon to horizon? Sea to shining sea, under the Moon, etc? We have in the text other passages that in fact, as i recall, say that Noah could not see a horizon that was not covered by water. That's what establishes the extent of Noah's flood, nit you. But they do not say that he could see the other side of the globe. Nor was his understanding of "the earth" a round planet named Earth. I'm sure you will say, yes but it says "greatly on the earth". And it does. But you read into this text, the name someone choose for the third planet from the Sun. Somebody just picked earth for the name of this planet one day. a day, much later than Noah's. Noah, had no concept of that planet, nor did Moses when he wrote earth to his people in that time period. He meant the land around him, not the planet!

Seems to me, you are not letting literature (ancient literature) be as it was intended to be understood in all cases.

But i agree that the NT passages require Noah and his family to be real people and the flood to be a real event and a devastating judgement event. But you read way to much into things to think, for example, the Bible says sea fossils are on young mountains because of the flood. The text calls mountains old for a reason.

 

[Rollo Tamasi]

Hi Chessman, you make some good points.
But I have never heard this before although you may be right.
I've read a great deal through the years, but not that.
I will have to research that before I can form an opinion.
Thank you.

 

[Vaccine]

Somebody just picked earth for the name of this planet one day. a day, much later than Noah's.

Interesting you bring this up. Curious our planet is not named 'Land' or after some Greek/Roman mythology like the others. While languages have different words for "Earth", they all get their meaning from ground or soil. Further, all languages do have a common origin, regardless what one believes about the garden of Eden. The somebody who taught Adam the words land and Earth was Jesus, who would also have known Earth means more than just soil, it is a planet. So even before anyone knew what a planet was, as far back as the origin of language, Earth was distinct from land

Earth is also the only planet with plate tectonics and oceans. The evidence is there if one looks for it, the evidence against it spawns from atheistic presuppositions. 99% of life died off this planet, it just depends in which presuppositions one accepts wether that happened 65 million years ago or not.

 

[WIP]

But why did he have to do that? Why does it have to be taken literally? I don't see it as a threat to God's power or sovereignty. Sure, could technically "could" do that, but that doesn't mean he did.

I don't think God "has" to do anything. He didn't have to create the world or us but he did.

 

[kevinmaynard]

Interesting you bring this up. Curious our planet is not named 'Land' or after some Greek/Roman mythology like the others. While languages have different words for "Earth", they all get their meaning from ground or soil. Further, all languages do have a common origin, regardless what one believes about the garden of Eden. The somebody who taught Adam the words land and Earth was Jesus, who would also have known Earth means more than just soil, it is a planet. So even before anyone knew what a planet was, as far back as the origin of language, Earth was distinct from land

Earth is also the only planet with plate tectonics and oceans. The evidence is there if one looks for it, the evidence against it spawns from atheistic presuppositions. 99% of life died off this planet, it just depends in which presuppositions one accepts wether that happened 65 million years ago or not.

Science and evidence and logic are not atheistic.