Noah's ark?

[unred typo]

Imagican wrote: And unred, I noticed that you deliberately left out the answers to the questions that I posed. Tough ones from your perspective huh?

Which questions did I miss? I may skipped a couple that were redundant but I thought I answered most of them. Did you read both of my posts? The chronological account of Genesis is after the one I wrote in answer to your questions. If I missed any, run them by me again.



Imagican wrote: Now guys, let's be realisitic here. IF Noah actually gathered TWO of EVERY animal that exists, why are there no records or specimens STILL in existence in the AREA that he landed AFTER the Flood? No GRIZZLY BEARS, NO MOUNTAIN LIONS, NO ZEBRAS, NO LIONS, NO ELEPHANTS, NO DUCK BILLED PLATYPUS, NO KANGAROOS, etc, etc, etc,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

Let’s think about that. Here are eight people getting out of the ark, onto a destroyed planet covered in flood debris. The first thing they want to do is sit down and make an inventory of all the animals before they leave for various parts of the globe that the Lord has sent them to. Obviously, they really need to record the number of kangaroos and other placental animals that are going to remote islands before the land bridges disappear. Or probably not. They probably just want to get their lives back together, explore their new world for food and build shelter. I have a couple of questions for you. If a land slide covers a swamp in Florida, how many kangaroos will be buried? Do you believe God is capable of creating an animal? If so, do you believe he can cause the animals he has created to go where he has chosen for them to live?



Imagican wrote: You take the words literal as if they were written for 'your' understanding. NOT SO. The information was given to a people that had ALMOST NO understanding of ANYTHING compared to what has been learned since. God CREATED US IN HIS IMAGE. Hard to tell sometimes when those that supposedly believe in Him refuse to attempt understanding. He NEVER meant for us to BE ignorant. The tree of knowledge WOULD have eventually been FREELY GIVEN to us upon our maturation. Many indicate that they are UNWILLING to learn. The knowledge of good and evil was NOT ALL EVIL. And basically what was involved was KNOWLEDGE PERIOD. Man was simply NOT READY for the discernment to know HOW to use it. We HAVE matured much. I admit that it seems like ONLY A FEW HAVE, but these have at least.

I guess you are light years ahead of me, since I have no idea what your point is here.



Imagican wrote: EVERYTHING written in the Bible is NOT the COMPLETE story. If you believe this, you have simply chosen to do so for the sake of excusing oneself from learning.

OK. I don’t think the Bible has the complete story of any events. There are millions of details left out. I certainly don’t remember the color of Adam’s hair being mentioned or the longitude/ latitude of the garden of Eden or the number of animals in the ark or how many segments the first centipede was created with. Are you satisfied now that I’m not the complete imbecile you thought I was or do I need to pass another Imagican test?



Imagican wrote: Do those that believe that the Earth is ONLY ten thousand years old believe that the ice bridge existed a mere 10,000 years ago or less. And that ALL the continental movement and separation of land masses, migration of men and animals has taken place in LESS than 10.000 years? Just two or three hundred years ago it wouldn't have been surprising to hear these words. But we have come SO far in our ability to discern the EVIDENCE of ancient Earth that for those to INSIST upon it now makes them look like backwoods hillbillys or something. As I have stated previous: All these that insist upon this 'young Earth' don't hessitate to allow a doctor to shove antibiotics in their arms when they are sick. Or allow a 'Heart specialist' perform a 'triple bipass' when needed. But will take the SAME effort that has been expended to explain the past and say, "Nope, I don't WANT to believe it. It CHANGES what I WANT to believe and I'm NOT going to do it". Funny folks indeed.

Do you know how long it takes to melt a glacier the size of North America? Do you know how long it would take for a group of people to walk across such an ice bridge? Do you have any idea how much bigger, more magnificent, and majestic God is than the universes he has created? Do you have a clue of just how powerful he is and how puny our entire planet is in his sight? The psalmist called it his foot stool. I don’t have any faith in doctors, my faith is in God. God gave man antibiotics and other medicines. If he chooses to hide knowledge from man, they would not even be able to find a cure for the common cold. If God has given doctors a cure for whatever may ail me, I will trust God to lead me there. If he doesn’t, he can heal me or I can die if that is what he chooses for me.

Imagican wrote: Does ANYONE out there KNOW what the word REPLINISH means. Was that word a MISTAKE or was it INTENDED to be in Genesis? To REPLINISH means to Plinish AGAIN. To 'do it OVER again'. Now, if Adam WAS the FIRST man EVER, HOW could God command him to REPLINISH the Earth? Sounds kinda foolish don't it?

That word threw me at first when I entertained the notion of a gap theory. Then I found out it has the same idea as the word, ‘reproduce’ on the earth, not ‘repopulate’ it.

 

[unred typo]

Orion wrote: And that ship was built by a small group of people over a hundred years or so, out of wood and pitch. Yeah, I bet that would be quite sea worthy, especially on the violently pitching ocean that was in turmoil.

Actually the ark was quite well suited for what it was designed for. It didn’t have to do anything but float. God gave Noah and his sons the knowledge to build it, just as he gave the workmen the skill needed to make the tabernacle and Solomon‘s temple. Where do you think this knowledge comes from?



Orion wrote: Do you realize how many trees it would take to build the ark? Find them, cut them, drag them to the build site? To cut them using very primative tools, prepare the logs (taking off leaves and branches), disposing SOMEWHERE of the unneeded portions? How dried out would the wood at the bottom of the ship be compared to the wood used for the top parts? How would that difference in density effect it? Where would he have found THAT much pitch to seal all the wood? These are just a FEW questions that arrise from this, and I haven't even gotten into the logistics of placing every animal type in the ark, including animals from vaste regions. The amount of work to care for them. The family and animals surviving on this ark for A YEAR!! How these animals would fair afterwards in a soggy dead wasteland. Again, just a FEW items.

I can see you know very little about building ships. Why don’t you get a book about the way the early sailing ships were made by hand. You would be amazed.

The debris from building is nothing more than firewood for heat and cooking for the workers and sawdust bedding for the animals. The animals entered the ark, just as they were lead to do, into their cages, or stalls. Noah only had to fill it with hay, leaves, grains, fruits and vegetables for the animals that were not going to be hibernating. If I were God, I would have most of the animals sleeping in shifts so that Noah had just enough work to keep him busy, and enough food to feed them all for the entire year. Maybe God is even smarter than I am, what do you think?



Orion wrote: And the most important issues, the fact that there is NO evidence of a year long deluge in any strata. There has been unbroken history and art from Egyptian cultures, Chinese cultures. . . .

Orion, you have been woefully misinformed. There is flood evidence all around the world, even on the tops of mountain ranges. It is just being interpreted as millions of years old. Not all flood layers are from Noah’s flood but many features such as the huge canyons of the west are actually the washed out land locked lakes trapped by flood debris and ice remains of the post flood events. There are more than one explanation for the layers of the earth. Much of the chronology of the Chinese and Egyptian cultures has been skewed to fit with the preconceived geological and evolutionary theories. Don't take my word for it. Do your own thinking. ;-)

 

[unred typo]

Atonement wrote:A Big Misconception about how many animals were brought onto the Ark. Many believe it was only two, when actually it was seven. So many people do not read chapter 7 verses 2 and 3.
Gen 7:2 Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.
Gen 7:3 Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth.
I know of only 4 unclean animals, maybe you can research to find more that are unclean in the Bible.
1) camel Lev 11:4
2) coney or horse - donkey Lev 11:5
3) hare or pig - Lev 11:6
4) swine - Lev 11:7
So actually Noah took aboard more then two of each kind. There are more clean animals then there are unclean..

Those are just a few examples of the unclean animals not to be eaten. There are many more that fit in those categories. Monkeys, zebras, dogs, cats, snakes, rats, moles, weasels, skunk, opossum, raccoon, elephants, turtles, kangaroo, lions, tigers and bears are unclean, to name a few more. Basically anything with paws is unclean. You also forgot the list of unclean birds in Lev 11:13-20. I would say that the unclean were the majority of the animal population.

 

[Atonement]

Hmmm before I elaborate on your post which is very insighful, let me research for more edification okay? Your God's Best my friend

 

[Imagican]

Unred,

The questions that I refered to:


One more GOOD ONE for ya unred, When Cain slew his brother and God decided his punishment. He stated that He was to place a mark on Cain so that EVERY one that would see him would KNOW what he had done. Cain states that this punsishment is more than he can bear, 'for EVERY MAN that sees the mark will attempt to KILL him'. Now, my question to you: WHO, WHO is God placing the mark on him to warn? And WHO is Cain afraid will attempt to kill him. If Adam and his children are the ONLY people on the planet, EVERY ONE of them ALREADY knows what Cain has done. So WHO are these that God is warning and who are these that Cain is afraid of? Answer me this one my friend.

See, I take what the Word SAYS and try to understand it. You have simply accepted what you have been taught without questioning ANY of it that doesn't line up with these teachings. I have refused to allow them to get away with that which DOESSN'T line up with scripture. That simple. I have read it and read it and read it with prayer and humility until the 'truth' has been revealed. All the questions of dinosaurs and their ages. All the questions of 'the fall'. All the questions of the 'flood'. These DO have answers that contain MUCH more 'truth' than the churches simple understanding of them. One day those that live eternal WILL understand it ALL. For now, the world understands as the the world understands and MOST of this is FAR FAR from independent study or understanding. Most is more 'wives tales' than anything resembling the 'truth'.

Please answer my question concerning Cains mark. And please don't think that future children and descendants of Adam and Eve will work for an answer. Cain WOULD not have been quick enough to 'SEE' into the future so don't even waster your words if this is your only answer.

Oh, and another interesting point. After EVERYTHING was FINISHED, the Bible states that there was NOT a man to till the ground, (a farmer). It does NOT say 'before there WAS a man, but before there was a man to 'TILL THE GROUND'. Genesis 2:5

5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.

See if you note ANYTHING specific about the bolded parts of these statements? Here it is:

Plants of the FIELD, Herbs of the FIELD. It doesn't say 'of the Earth', but 'of the FIELD. A field is a 'prepared' piece of land for farming. As I have stated before, I accept the Word for what it SAYS, not what I WANT it to state.

After the first creation, the Bible specifically states:

Thus the heavens and Earth were FINISHED, and ALL the HOSTS of them. And on the seventh day God rested.

This IS what the Bible states. Nothing created by ME here. Plain and simple TRUTH. We are given specific days in which each of God's creations was created. You say that the second chapter is simply a 'return' to the details of the first. Doesn't fit, my friend. Too many variables in the statements made for this to be TRUE. Coupled with what we NOW KNOW about the beginnings of man, this fairy tale doesn't hold water. And there are NO such details of consecutive order in the second chapter for the traditional understanding to be legit. Just don't work. Then when we skip ahead we find the Son's of God mating with the daughters of men. It's as easy as determining WHO these Son's of God are. That leaves Noah who was PERFECT in his GENERATIONS. The meaning behind this is crystal clear. No word play here.

Just as Cain went 'outside' his blood-line by taking a wife of the 'first creation', other descendants of Adam and Eve did the SAME THING. The Sons of God, (descendants of Adam and Eve, those that WERE LIVING SOULS), began to mate with the 'daughters of men, (the first creation, no communion with God), and for this cause, man's heart became EVIL, (rebelious), continually. The Sons of God began to LOSE their memory of the ONE TRUE GOD and follow the ways of the daughters of men.

And He breathed into his notrils the BREATH OF LIFE and man BECAME a LIVING SOUL. This is the KEY my friend. With these words we are able to understand TRULY the fall of man. What happened to 'man's soul' when he began to mate with those WITHOUT spiritual communion with God. Spiritual adultery was committed and THIS is the reason that God wished to destroy those that had done so. This IS why there was NO reason for a 'world wide' flood and the obvious explanation of details that the 'traditional story' is unable to answer.

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Oh, and unred, I have never meant to indicate that you were lacking in intellegence. Far from it. Some of the MOST intellegent people on the planet have been unable to 'step outside the box' and have chosen instead to simply accept what others have offered. No different than what we are dealing with right now.

I realize that you have reasoned out your understanding and have come to accept it in the way that 'makes sense' to you. I have NOT tried to 'belittle ANY' or attack thier ability to understand. Just tried to point out that ALL is NOT what it may 'seem' at times. There is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH more to the story than what is contained in the few words of The Bible. The Bible is ONLY THE BEGINNING OF UNDERSTANDING. As Paul was QUICK to point out: 'When I was a child I thought as a child. But when I became an man, (adult), I put away those childish things and began to act like a man'. There is MUCH more to this saying than the understanding of LOVE. Love IS what he refered to, but there IS MORE.

MEC

 

[Guest]

Actually the ark was quite well suited for what it was designed for. It didn’t have to do anything but float. God gave Noah and his sons the knowledge to build it, just as he gave the workmen the skill needed to make the tabernacle and Solomon‘s temple. Where do you think this knowledge comes from?

Any ship builder would tell you that a WOOD ship of that size would never remain intact. Perhaps a few days, but not a whole year!

I can see you know very little about building ships. Why don’t you get a book about the way the early sailing ships were made by hand. You would be amazed.

And what SIZE were those ships in that book? Check their matterials used!

[quote="unred typo":cbf6f]The debris from building is nothing more than firewood for heat and cooking for the workers and sawdust bedding for the animals. The animals entered the ark, just as they were lead to do, into their cages, or stalls. Noah only had to fill it with hay, leaves, grains, fruits and vegetables for the animals that were not going to be hibernating. If I were God, I would have most of the animals sleeping in shifts so that Noah had just enough work to keep him busy, and enough food to feed them all for the entire year. Maybe God is even smarter than I am, what do you think?

You completely missed the point. Noah and his SMALL group of people would have STILL had to cut down thousands of trees . . . . where did he get them? How far did he travel to find them, cut them down, then drag them to the build site?

As far as animals hybernating, name how many animals hybernate? :-?

Orion, you have been woefully misinformed. There is flood evidence all around the world, even on the tops of mountain ranges. It is just being interpreted as millions of years old. Not all flood layers are from Noah’s flood but many features such as the huge canyons of the west are actually the washed out land locked lakes trapped by flood debris and ice remains of the post flood events. There are more than one explanation for the layers of the earth.

Consider this about the Grand Canyon and the problems of a global flood: The first problem is that the basement of the canyon is made of layers of igneous rock that has been tilted and eroded level. The next problem is the sedimentary layers above. Each layer is different than the next, requiring a different depositional environment. Limestones require shallow and calm water, and only stacks up at 1-2 cm/year at best. If the water contains any other sediments then the limestone would not be as pure as those found in the GC. In one instance, there is also a desert landscape preserved in between limestone layers known as the Coconino sandstones. These sandstones are preserved wind blown sand dunes, complete with preserved reptile footprints and raindrop impressions. If these layers were produced by a cataclysmic flood, then you need a desert underwater, complete with rain underwater.

Much of the chronology of the Chinese and Egyptian cultures has been skewed to fit with the preconceived geological and evolutionary theories. Don't take my word for it. Do your own thinking. ;-)

[/quote:cbf6f]

Really? It's been skewed to fit theories? :-? I HAVE been doing my own thinking. Don't think that I enjoy it when the faith that I had held onto all my life is eroded by scientific answers. It doesn't make me happy, but I can't just place my head in the sand and pretend that these things are all false! NONE of this would be a problem if concrete evidence was left of a global flood, or migration patters of EVERY animal family originating from the area of Mount Sinai, or flood sorting layers that would actually LOOK like they WERE sorted in a massive flood. And that is JUST the flood.

At one time, christians thought the earth was flat and the center of the universe. Both of these were proven to be wrong. That meant that OUR INTERPRETATION of those passages were wrong, OR that they were figurative poetic language not meant to be taken literally. I see the flood myth the same, as do I most of Genesis. Until I am actually shown otherwise, then I must continue to question.

 

[Imagican]

I don't have all the answers nor do I claim to. Thus it must be noted that I do not intend to seek the answer your looking to receive. God Bless

And therefor you will probably not receive it. Yet I bet you have accepted what you have been offered 'from the churches'.

MEC

 

[Atonement]

Right on.. More power to ya. Do I wanna make a Church happy or God happy? Hmm let me think.. That's a no brainer

 

[Imagican]

Don't be dismayed orion. If you have read any of my posts, you will quickly see that there was NO need for a 'global' flood. Just because that is the limited understanding of MOST Christians, do NOT let that impede your faith. God IS God and His story IS true. The difference is in the interpretation.

The Earth IS millions and millions if not billions of years old. Many will TRY to make it a mere 10,000 years old based on 'their beliefs in a story that was misinterpreted from the beginning. Not a biggie.

There WAS a flood. It was designed and implimented to destroy a 'certain' people though and NOT to destroy EVERYTHING as misinterpreted. There is NO proof of a world wide flood WHATSOEVER. Simply grasping at straws to continue to 'hold on' to misunderstanding.

To those in the AREA of the flood, it surely must have SEEMED to cover the 'face of the Earth'. But even the concept of 'global' wasn't even developed at that time.

And two of EVERY animal was NOT necessary. Only two and seven of those needed to sustain the survivors for the time it took for animals to migrate BACK into the area where the flood took place.

The Grand Canyon is a perfect example that COMPLETELY destroys the concept of a 'ten thousand year old Earth'. It took hundreds of thousands, if not MILLIONS of years for this to be formed. You seem to have a pretty firm grasp of this reality.

Folks, it took millions of years for the Earth to bring forth that which IS necessary for the plight of man to take place. Gold, diamonds, rubies, etc.... took perhaps millions of years to form so that they would BE THERE for man when the time came for them to 'play their part' in the generation of man.

Oil, sand, and iron ore are prime examples of things NEEDED for man to 'take his place' in the respective history of the Earth.

Once again, the idea of a literal 'six day creation' is as limited as those that choose to accept it. You would have God LIMIITED to HIS CREATION. Ludicrous. He is limited to NOTHING that we have knowledge of. Those at the time the story was written had absolutely NO CONCEPTION of time past their existence. And man is SO conceited, even to this day, so full of pride that he believes that HE is ALL important to EVERYTHING. Not so, my friends. God created EVERYTHING for a purpose. And He did it in HIS TIME. He MUST communicate to US as Children with liimited understanding. Otherwise the message would be completely lost on us.

So, orion, do NOT let the limited understanding of others confuse or 'turn you away' from the 'truth'. It is difficult to have communion with those with such limited understanding but even that is SECONDARY to a personal relationship with the Father through His Son. Accomplish this and the rest will work itself out.

MEC

 

[unred typo]

Imagican wrote: The questions that I refered to: … Please answer my question concerning Cains mark.

I answered that. ( Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:22 am) I also put the account of Genesis in chronological order for you in a separate post after it. It’s just before Gabbylittleangel.



Imagican wrote:
Oh, and another interesting point. After EVERYTHING was FINISHED, the Bible states that there was NOT a man to till the ground, (a farmer). It does NOT say 'before there WAS a man, but before there was a man to 'TILL THE GROUND'. Genesis 2:5
5And every plant of the field before it was in the earth, and every herb of the field before it grew: for the LORD God had not caused it to rain upon the earth, and there was not a man to till the ground.
See if you note ANYTHING specific about the bolded parts of these statements? Here it is:
Plants of the FIELD, Herbs of the FIELD. It doesn't say 'of the Earth', but 'of the FIELD. A field is a 'prepared' piece of land for farming. As I have stated before, I accept the Word for what it SAYS, not what I WANT it to state.

I know a little about farmers, farming and fields. Not to cast any dispersions on their noble profession but any Neanderthal can till the ground. For you to claim that God created a race of people who haven’t the brains to till the ground is more than a little weird. If you want to go with your idea that these are mutant giants, you can do so but I don’t see the need for such contortions with the scripture. If faithless men had not fabricated the ‘holy geological column‘ and the whole radiocarbon dating scheme to undermine the Word of God, you would simply say that descendants of Adam were the ones who became giants through improper union with angels.

A field can be nothing more than a patch of grass. There are fields where no one has ever run a furrow. You’re reading into the text here. Grasping for cultivated straws.



Imagican wrote: After the first creation, the Bible specifically states:
Thus the heavens and Earth were FINISHED, and ALL the HOSTS of them. And on the seventh day God rested.
This IS what the Bible states. Nothing created by ME here. Plain and simple TRUTH. We are given specific days in which each of God's creations was created. You say that the second chapter is simply a 'return' to the details of the first. Doesn't fit, my friend. Too many variables in the statements made for this to be TRUE. Coupled with what we NOW KNOW about the beginnings of man, this fairy tale doesn't hold water. And there are NO such details of consecutive order in the second chapter for the traditional understanding to be legit. Just don't work. Then when we skip ahead we find the Son's of God mating with the daughters of men. It's as easy as determining WHO these Son's of God are. That leaves Noah who was PERFECT in his GENERATIONS. The meaning behind this is crystal clear. No word play here.

Clear as mud. There’s lots of room for speculation here. I have held several views and I am always reevaluating my position but as long as one is happy that what they believe does not undermine their understanding of God, I don’t think it will be a big deal. I don’t trust men who freely admit that they disbelieve the Bible and find the whole idea of God to be some kind of populace controlling sham. It makes me say that they may have reason to suspect such tactics since they are using them. If the evolution theory did not (attempt to) disprove and discredit the Bible account, you would see it die a undisturbed death under several layers of dust. Understand I am not speaking of you here. You appear to be sincerely trying to reconcile the Bible with the evidence you believe to be real. Nothing wrong with that. You can call me paranoid but I believe it is a trap when you trust the findings of men more than scripture however.



Imagican wrote: Just as Cain went 'outside' his blood-line by taking a wife of the 'first creation', other descendants of Adam and Eve did the SAME THING. The Sons of God, (descendants of Adam and Eve, those that WERE LIVING SOULS), began to mate with the 'daughters of men, (the first creation, no communion with God), and for this cause, man's heart became EVIL, (rebelious), continually. The Sons of God began to LOSE their memory of the ONE TRUE GOD and follow the ways of the daughters of men.

You have a creative theory. You can probably make it work for you. It just doesn’t ring true for me. You’ll no doubt drive godless evolutionists berserk with it if you can thwart their attempts to disprove God. Good luck with that.



Imagican wrote: And He breathed into his notrils the BREATH OF LIFE and man BECAME a LIVING SOUL. This is the KEY my friend. With these words we are able to understand TRULY the fall of man. What happened to 'man's soul' when he began to mate with those WITHOUT spiritual communion with God. Spiritual adultery was committed and THIS is the reason that God wished to destroy those that had done so. This IS why there was NO reason for a 'world wide' flood and the obvious explanation of details that the 'traditional story' is unable to answer.

I don’t consider my version the ‘traditional story’ and I have spent considerable time and brain cells chasing down answers. My research has been helped with the reading of the book of Jasher.( http://www.nazarene.net/jasher/ There might be better links but some are to a phony version. ) I haven’t come across any questions I couldn’t answer to my satisfaction with a literal reading of Genesis. Since reading Jasher, the earth’s physical evidence is quite understandable as well. In Jasher, it is recorded that the flood of Noah was not the first flood, although it was the first world wide one. The details are not much more than in Genesis but they do make the picture clearer. :fadein:

 

[Dalen Naskiel]

Noahs Ark is supposed to be true...

Though I think it's a bit exagerated in some parts, I still believe it...

 

[unred typo]

Orion wrote: Any ship builder would tell you that a WOOD ship of that size would never remain intact. Perhaps a few days, but not a whole year!

Any ship builder who would tell you that a ship designed by God couldn’t remain intact isn’t too intact himself. Certainly his faith is not. I think what may be throwing you is the word, ‘ship’. I think it was more a floating box of a three story barge. From the dimensions, it sounds like it looked somewhat like a coffin and not your typical ‘ship’.



Orion wrote: You completely missed the point. Noah and his SMALL group of people would have STILL had to cut down thousands of trees . . . . where did he get them? How far did he travel to find them, cut them down, then drag them to the build site?
As far as animals hybernating, name how many animals hybernate?

Actually, it doesn’t say how many were involved with the actual building of the ark. Solomon ‘built’ the temple but I doubt if he even lifted a hammer. As for the trees, they had been growing for hundreds of years now and I find it rather silly to assume that God told Noah to go to some treeless area and build anything out of wood. My guess, he sent him to a gopher wood forest, you think?
I read somewhere, you’ll have to trust me or research it yourself, that all animals have the ability to hibernate. If God says “hibernate,†I bet they hibernate, just like they came to the ark when he sent them there. If you are going to deny God any power, you might as well toss your Bible.



Orion wrote: Consider this about the Grand Canyon and the problems of a global flood: The first problem is that the basement of the canyon is made of layers of igneous rock that has been tilted and eroded level. The next problem is the sedimentary layers above. Each layer is different than the next, requiring a different depositional environment. Limestones require shallow and calm water, and only stacks up at 1-2 cm/year at best. If the water contains any other sediments then the limestone would not be as pure as those found in the GC. In one instance, there is also a desert landscape preserved in between limestone layers known as the Coconino sandstones. These sandstones are preserved wind blown sand dunes, complete with preserved reptile footprints and raindrop impressions. If these layers were produced by a cataclysmic flood, then you need a desert underwater, complete with rain underwater.

Not all areas of the globe are going to show a uniform flood sediment layer nicely sandwiched between ‘paradise lost’ and ’Sex and the City’ with ‘Noah was here’ scratched in the sandstone. Igneous rock, tilted and eroded, sound like fountains of the deep being broken UP, then violent waters of Noah’s flood wearing them down in a matter of days or hours. Sedimentary layers above them may be sands from desert areas, caused by a world wide drought, (see Jasher) that had been previously laid on top.

Other places would show evidence of floods of tsunami proportions never before imagined carrying tons of crushed rock and debris over previous layers caused by the flooding of 1/3 of the world by the River Gihon during an earlier judgment. Some areas would be layers quickly buried by volcanic ash that left dino nests, footprints and other delicate impressions. This may have occurred periodically over the hundred +/-years prior to the final destruction of all life. After the flood, life would soon flourish in the rich muck since nature has a built in resiliency that makes biologists marvel on those cool nature shows we love.

Another aspect that is often ignored is that the fountains of the deep may have been a nicely layered filtration system to keep the planets plumbing in working order. God has certainly mastered the use of the ecological biosphere in keeping this world in tune. These layers aren’t going to simply disappear under the destruction above them. The creatures in these layers are going to make fine primitive fossils, don’t you think? Back on top, the animals after the flood aren’t going to be allowed to run amuck and some populations of them will need to be destroyed if they are overly aggressive or if their habitant has become obsolete or unable to survive the changes. ( Sorry, Barney… you‘re just too purple)

Anyways, I could find many great explanations for the layers we have and none of them involve millions of years. You could too, if you didn’t, as Imagican says, have you’re head buried in the sand. :wink: Continue to question. It’s more fun. :-D

 

[unred typo]

Burner of heretics, Cleanser of Souls, Dalen Naskiel wrote:
Noahs Ark is supposed to be true...
Though I think it's a bit exagerated in some parts, I still believe it…

The claim of exaggerated claims has been highly exaggerated. Cleanse thy soul of all doubt, thou heretic! :wink:

 

[Dalen Naskiel]

Thus, I atone...

 

[Atonement]

Imagican
unred typo


Would you two do me (us) all a favor???? Would you not post so much at one time, you have alot to say, but honestly I stop reading half way through because it's so much. When you cut and paste also please give the source. This is breaking the boards TOS Rule #9

9 - Please keep posts down to a respectable length and provide source and/or links for your info. We want to respect copyrighted material. Plus, you stand a better chance of getting your post read if it contains a link with an excerpt from source that's relative to your point.

Thank you for your support.

 

[unred typo]

I haven’t used cut and paste from any other person’s writings. Even my own repetitious ramblings are original, real time, one of a kind garbage just for you. The only cut/paste I did was when I took the Bible verses from Genesis 1 and Genesis 2 and meshed them into one chronological account, but I did the unscrambling myself. I just took the verses from the http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/ but I didn’t think you had to list the Bible source when cut and pasting scripture. Anyways, my verses were taken from there, although not used in the same order. The chronology of the account is my own work, not cut/paste. I’m sure I’m not the first to do it. All my other bla bla bla is typoed one tedious word at a time.

I apologize if my posts are too long and boring. I try to keep posts to a page or less and when quoting the other poster, sometimes it adds a lot even if my answer is only a sentence. Maybe it would help if we only discussed one point at a time. I know it would help me out. I spend way too much time on here.

Thanks for the admonition. From now on, I’ll only write when I have something to say and when I have nothing to say, I’ll do it with even less words. Are you still reading? :-D How about now? :wink:

 

[Atonement]

Thank you for your support unred.

I read all of this one hehe.. I'm not stating you are cutting and pasting from other sites but if/when you do please give the source. Thank you very much. God Bless

 

[Imagican]

Atonement,

I hope you weren't refering to me 'cuting and pasting' either. I have offered nothing that wasn't taken from the Word or my OWN understanding. And there IS much to offer concerning the issues that have been discussed so far. I have 'tried' to make my post as direct and 'to the point' as possible. But when dealing with such issues, it's not always easy to do so in 'just a 'few' words'. Sorry

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Imagican wrote: You take the words literal as if they were written for 'your' understanding. NOT SO. The information was given to a people that had ALMOST NO understanding of ANYTHING compared to what has been learned since. God CREATED US IN HIS IMAGE. Hard to tell sometimes when those that supposedly believe in Him refuse to attempt understanding. He NEVER meant for us to BE ignorant. The tree of knowledge WOULD have eventually been FREELY GIVEN to us upon our maturation. Many indicate that they are UNWILLING to learn. The knowledge of good and evil was NOT ALL EVIL. And basically what was involved was KNOWLEDGE PERIOD. Man was simply NOT READY for the discernment to know HOW to use it. We HAVE matured much. I admit that it seems like ONLY A FEW HAVE, but these have at least.

I guess you are light years ahead of me, since I have no idea what your point is here.

My point? That MANY take the Word to be offered specifically TO THEM. Not so. Much was offered by God TO a specific people and most was offered in a way that a much more 'primitive' man could understand. If The Word were offered 'right this minute' to US specifically, it would contain MUCH more intricate detail concerning things that those of the past would have been COMPLETELY UNABLE to understand.

Take Revelation for example. Most accept that there is MUCH sybolism involved with it's telling. This was NEEDED, for John would CERTAINLY not have understood much that was offered IF it had been offered as 'reality'. How could he have described helicopters from HIS perspective? Or a tank, jet, atomic weapon, etc............. He was given a vision of the future but what he saw was well beyond his ability to describe it in ANY way other than WHAT he actually understood.

And we WERE created in the IMAGE of God. With the capacity to UNDERSTAND what God understands. We were TOLD this in Genesis. My purpose for stating this is that WE ARE ABLE to learn 'truth' beyond the 'written Word'. The ability to understand the 'natural world' in which we live. You would obviously deny this for the sake of traditional teachings that have LIMITED this ability.

And I have YET to find where you offered any attempt at an answer to the situation concerning Cain and his punishment. When God stated that He would place a 'mark' on Cain so that EVERYONE that would see him would KNOW what he had done. WHO, my friend. Who did God wish to warn and WHO was Cain afraid would slay him?

Oh, and another good one. When God confronted Adam and Eve AFTER they had eaten from the 'tree', God ask them WHY they were hiding. There answer provoked another question: 'WHO told you that you were naked?' Do you think God was ignorant? How could he have asked WHO if they werwe the ONLY two humans on the planet? I mean that's a pretty confusing statement IF they were. Think about it.

MEC