Noah's ark?

[unred typo]

Imagican, please explain why God, who speaks quite plainly in Genesis, could not have said to ‘poor primitive Adam’ that he created a race of men who were not given the breath of God like he was, and that instead of merely destroying them, some were left here to tempt him to do things God will punish him for? I’m not sure what you believe here but I don’t think it would be beyond description even to a 5 year old if plainly stated. I still don’t see your point. Adam talked with God in the garden and no doubt knew many things that we can only guess about. He was no imbecile. In fact, he was probably more brilliant than us ‘defects.’ Please explain again. Duh.

As I told you before, I answered the Cain’s mark question, ( Posted: Sun Sep 03, 2006 8:22 am) but just in case you have trouble reading all the way to the bottom of my posts, I’ll redo it here in living color. Adam had many sons and daughters. The fact that Cain had reason to fear retribution proves there were other sons not mentioned, Abel’s big (and/or little) brothers, who no doubt have married sisters, or cousins and had children of their own. Figure how many births could have occurred in 125 years. Just because only Cain, Abel and Seth are mentioned, does not limit Adam’s offspring to those three. Abel was a son who resembled Adam, probably Eve‘s favorite. There is no telling how many more sons and daughters she had before she gave birth to another son who looked like dear old Dad.

As for WHO told Adam they were naked, I think God knew, he just wanted Adam to see that he was caught by his new found knowledge of good and evil that betrayed the fact that he had eaten of the tree.

I think we have left Noah in the dust, btw..... but who's still reading? :-D

 

[Imagican]

Unred,

Why didn't God simply tell Adam and Eve that the tree of knowledge was for a 'later time'? Why didn't God explain EXACTLY what would happen if they were to eat it's fruit? As stated on numerous occasions, communication is ONLY possible in a 'way' that is UNDERSTOOD. Many things revealed five thousand years ago were ONLY able to be understood by those that LIVED five thousand years ago. If you were to have the vision that John was given, it is MUCH more likely that you would be able to describe it in more UNDERSTANDABLE descriptions.

Just as the story of Noah and the ark is, let's say, simplified, so that those that 'read, past tense' it would be able to 'comprehend' the story. If technical terms were used to explain 'where the water came from' and 'exactly' what was destroyed and what wasn't, it would need descriptions of events and science that those of the time, (and those up to just a couple of hundred years ago), would NOT have understood. And MAYBE, we weren't even READY for such information.

My point through this entire dialogue has been that is MUCH that we DO NOT know and MUCH that we HAVE learned. And MUCH of what we HAVE LEARNED does NOT take away from The Word.

Question: IF, and I ask IF, it was PROVEN to you BEYOND any doubt, that there were PEOPLE pre-existant to Adam and Eve. That what you have been bombarded with concerning ancient man WAS in FACT, history, how would you THEN view the Bible and it's story of creation? Would you simply abandon The Word? Or, would you ATTEMPT to see IF it somehow FIT into The Word? My point? I have a basic understanding of geology and the study of ancient man. These two COMPLETELY negate the 'story' that has come to be accepted by main-stream Christianity. I accept science as the understanding of God's WORK. When science finds NEW things, I don't simply DENY but TRY to understand how these things fit into the picture. Since I KNOW that the Bible is NOT EVERYTHING there is to know about creation or God or His relationship to man, or heaven, I KNOW that there IS more to learn. We do it NOW on a daily basis. Just because we may not have completely understood something that was offered five thousand years ago DOES NOT mean that we will NEVER understand it. I believe that MUCH of this understanding is RIGHT BEFORE OUR VERY EYES but MANY Christians simply refuse to 'let go' of their strongly held understandings of the past.

MEC

 

[Ambient]

Good post, Imagican.

There IS an explaination that can be used that explains man being here before Adam and Eve, and it is right from the Bible. Genesis 1:27 So God created man in his [own] image, in the image of God created he him; male and female created he them.

Many people see chapter 2 as a "retelling of chapter 1" I disagree as it only speaks of one creation day, and only the formation of Adam, and some animals, AND trees that were GOOD FOR FOOD.

They are obviously two completely different accounts. Thus, many have given the idea that there were people created before Adam and Eve, the other non-Hebrew races, people who Cain would have gone to and married. There is no specific time frame as to when this happened, so it could have been millions of years.

 

[unred typo]

Imagican wrote Why didn't God simply tell Adam and Eve that the tree of knowledge was for a 'later time'? Why didn't God explain EXACTLY what would happen if they were to eat it's fruit?

How do you know God didn’t? Certainly all conversations with God are not recorded. Information we don’t have access to limits our understanding, but I don‘t think the account is false or contains errors or exaggerations. Since it says all the world was destroyed, I’m betting all the world was destroyed. There’s not much wiggle room there.



Imagican wrote Just as the story of Noah and the ark is, let's say, simplified, so that those that 'read, past tense' it would be able to 'comprehend' the story. If technical terms were used to explain 'where the water came from' and 'exactly' what was destroyed and what wasn't, it would need descriptions of events and science that those of the time, (and those up to just a couple of hundred years ago), would NOT have understood. And MAYBE, we weren't even READY for such information.

Really? So you feel there is more to the expressions, “windows of heaven†and “fountains of the deep� I agree they are metaphorical descriptions but I think the opposite is true of what you suggest. They understood what the words meant because they saw exactly what happened. We can only speculate as to what a ‘window in heaven’ is, or what the ‘fountains of the deep’ consisted of. Adam probably asked God many questions about how his world worked and God probably taught him all sorts of things to equip him to manage it successfully. I have my own scientific theory but it's too long for most reader’s attention span to bother posting here.



Imagican wrote I have a basic understanding of geology and the study of ancient man. These two COMPLETELY negate the 'story' that has come to be accepted by main-stream Christianity. I accept science as the understanding of God's WORK. When science finds NEW things, I don't simply DENY but TRY to understand how these things fit into the picture.

Congratulations. You have bought into the big lie fabricated by the artful master of lies himself and somehow managed to weave some truth into it. I’m really glad for you. I, too, take in the “NEW things†offered by science and fit them into my theology as well. I just have seen past the whole dating scheme and the layers make sense without the whole ‘geological column’ myth, and if suddenly conclusive evidence were to be found that proved Genesis to be as evolutionists claim, I would put my Bible in the trash and just keep a copy of the words of Christ and live by them. Just love one another and nobody gets hurt. :wink:

 

[Imagican]

Ok, So now I have to be 'following Satan' in order to undertand. You know, this is EXACTLY what the churches have been FEEDING their 'flocks' for thousands of years now. FEAR and accusations. If Galileo had 'fallen' for 'your trap' we would still be in the dark ages. The church imprisoned him for publishing his findings, (Which WERE Truth). Yet PROVED that what the churches 'believed' was WRONG.

MEC

 

[LittleNipper]

Unred,

Why didn't God simply tell Adam and Eve that the tree of knowledge was for a 'later time'? Why didn't God explain EXACTLY what would happen if they were to eat it's fruit? As stated on numerous occasions, communication is ONLY possible in a 'way' that is UNDERSTOOD. Many things revealed five thousand years ago were ONLY able to be understood by those that LIVED five thousand years ago. If you were to have the vision that John was given, it is MUCH more likely that you would be able to describe it in more UNDERSTANDABLE descriptions.

Just as the story of Noah and the ark is, let's say, simplified, so that those that 'read, past tense' it would be able to 'comprehend' the story. If technical terms were used to explain 'where the water came from' and 'exactly' what was destroyed and what wasn't, it would need descriptions of events and science that those of the time, (and those up to just a couple of hundred years ago), would NOT have understood. And MAYBE, we weren't even READY for such information.

My point through this entire dialogue has been that is MUCH that we DO NOT know and MUCH that we HAVE learned. And MUCH of what we HAVE LEARNED does NOT take away from The Word.

Question: IF, and I ask IF, it was PROVEN to you BEYOND any doubt, that there were PEOPLE pre-existant to Adam and Eve. That what you have been bombarded with concerning ancient man WAS in FACT, history, how would you THEN view the Bible and it's story of creation? Would you simply abandon The Word? Or, would you ATTEMPT to see IF it somehow FIT into The Word? My point? I have a basic understanding of geology and the study of ancient man. These two COMPLETELY negate the 'story' that has come to be accepted by main-stream Christianity. I accept science as the understanding of God's WORK. When science finds NEW things, I don't simply DENY but TRY to understand how these things fit into the picture. Since I KNOW that the Bible is NOT EVERYTHING there is to know about creation or God or His relationship to man, or heaven, I KNOW that there IS more to learn. We do it NOW on a daily basis. Just because we may not have completely understood something that was offered five thousand years ago DOES NOT mean that we will NEVER understand it. I believe that MUCH of this understanding is RIGHT BEFORE OUR VERY EYES but MANY Christians simply refuse to 'let go' of their strongly held understandings of the past.

MEC

I understand science as man's understanding of what he sees, and not as an understanding that must, as a result, be factual. Satan is still the Prince of this present age. What a scientist may misunderstand or not see maybe the very thing that destroys his theories. If man was brought back to GOD purely by what he saw around him, there would be not need for Divine Revelation through the Word. Man knows what is a sin because of what GOD tells him in HIS Word is sin. Man will rationalize everything away, but he cannot nor will not discover for himself what is absolute. Creation, the Flood, The Fall, and Salvation are absolutes.

 

[Dalen Naskiel]

In my opinion, I still don't think that the arc held two of every single animal there was in the whole world. I think it was the animals around the region of the area. Maybe only two of every cattle, sheep, horses, and maybe just a few others. Also, I think that the arc wasn't as huge as the Bible claims. Lastly, it might of been just a flood of the Nile and some other rivers that lasted many more days then usual, because God just made it flood and rain constantly. Because it was way back in time, the people might of thought it was flooding all over the earth when it was just around that region. I still think God played a huge role in this though.

I believe in alot of the Bible stories, just not word for word. I still think there has to be some logic. Though I still believe in God over logic

 

[Ambient]

It's tough. It really is. One part wants to believe that it was an actual event, but because the evidence doesn't correspond, another part wants to justify the problem. That means calling it a parable. The other option, that the Bible is false, isn't very appealing.

 

[Lewis]

In my opinion, I still don't think that the arc held two of every single animal there was in the whole world. I think it was the animals around the region of the area. Maybe only two of every cattle, sheep, horses, and maybe just a few others. Also, I think that the arc wasn't as huge as the Bible claims. Lastly, it might of been just a flood of the Nile and some other rivers that lasted many more days then usual, because God just made it flood and rain constantly. Because it was way back in time, the people might of thought it was flooding all over the earth when it was just around that region. I still think God played a huge role in this though.

I believe in alot of the Bible stories, just not word for word. I still think there has to be some logic. Though I still believe in God over logic

Well that tells me that you do not believe God's Word, and you are what we call a skeptic. And also there was only one land mass at that time, and the Bible says that God caused all the animals to come to Noah. And let me see here, I am doing this from memory. The Ark was 450 feet long and 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 500 railroad box cars could fit in it, and there was no other bigger sea vessel until the early 19th century. And like I said it was just one large land mass at that time, the flood was world wide. Take a look at eastern South America and western Africa and you can still see that they were connected at one time. And one more thing you just can't believe some of the Bible, you have to believe the whole Bible.

 

[unred typo]

Imagican wrote Ok, So now I have to be 'following Satan' in order to undertand. You know, this is EXACTLY what the churches have been FEEDING their 'flocks' for thousands of years now. FEAR and accusations. If Galileo had 'fallen' for 'your trap' we would still be in the dark ages. The church imprisoned him for publishing his findings, (Which WERE Truth). Yet PROVED that what the churches 'believed' was WRONG.

Hey, nothing personal. I don’t have a ‘trap’ and I didn’t say you were “following Satan†anyways…I said you bought into Satan’s big lie. We can’t both be right and we know Satan is the father of untruth so one of us has fallen for a lie, wouldn’t you agree? I don’t expect you think I’m right and you’re wrong or we wouldn’t be having this conversation.

You gave me a ‘what if’ to consider. What IF, and I’ll use your same IF statement, it was PROVEN to you BEYOND any doubt, that there were NO PEOPLE pre-existent to Adam and Eve. That what you have been bombarded with concerning ancient man WAS in FACT, a fabrication, how would you THEN view the Bible and it's story of creation? What would you conclude as to the source of the cunningly devised fable? What would you speculate as to the motive for such a tale?

 

[Vic C.]

And like I said it was just one large land mass at that time, the flood was world wide. Take a look at eastern South America and western Africa and you can still see that they were connected at one time. And one more thing you just can't believe some of the Bible, you have to believe the whole Bible.

Hey Lewis. What up? 8-) I sort of believe the same thing. It is interesring to note that diamond mining on both continents are done on practically the same latitude line. Something to think about.

Ok, lets have some fun. One land mass that somehow seperated. What caused them to seperate? When did they start to seperate? At what rate did they seperate? What caused them to stop seperating or are they still in motion? :-D

 

[unred typo]

Ambient wrote: It's tough. It really is. One part wants to believe that it was an actual event, but because the evidence doesn't correspond, another part wants to justify the problem. That means calling it a parable. The other option, that the Bible is false, isn't very appealing.

What evidence exactly doesn’t correspond to the Bible account? Maybe you have taken some things as proof that are only poor speculation.

 

[Dalen Naskiel]

[quote="Dalen Naskiel":d7b3c]In my opinion, I still don't think that the arc held two of every single animal there was in the whole world. I think it was the animals around the region of the area. Maybe only two of every cattle, sheep, horses, and maybe just a few others. Also, I think that the arc wasn't as huge as the Bible claims. Lastly, it might of been just a flood of the Nile and some other rivers that lasted many more days then usual, because God just made it flood and rain constantly. Because it was way back in time, the people might of thought it was flooding all over the earth when it was just around that region. I still think God played a huge role in this though.

I believe in alot of the Bible stories, just not word for word. I still think there has to be some logic. Though I still believe in God over logic

Well that tells me that you do not believe God's Word, and you are what we call a skeptic. And also there was only one land mass at that time, and the Bible says that God caused all the animals to come to Noah. And let me see here, I am doing this from memory. The Ark was 450 feet long and 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 500 railroad box cars could fit in it, and there was no other bigger sea vessel until the early 19th century. And like I said it was just one large land mass at that time, the flood was world wide. Take a look at eastern South America and western Africa and you can still see that they were connected at one time. And one more thing you just can't believe some of the Bible, you have to believe the whole Bible. [/quote:d7b3c]

Guess I'am skeptic then...
Also, I agree with ya on the continents once being one whole one. But I think that was 65 million years ago, when dinosaurs were about. I think Noah's Arc took place much more recently, when the continents were split.

Domo Arigato Mr.Roboto :robot: (Sorry, but I had to put that)

 

[Gabbylittleangel]

Ok, lets have some fun. One land mass that somehow seperated. What caused them to seperate? When did they start to seperate? At what rate did they seperate? What caused them to stop seperating or are they still in motion? :-D

Gen 7:11 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.

As the rain came down, the fountains of the great deep were broken up.
I tend to believe that the breaking occurred on what we call 'fault lines"

This is from Christian Answers website.
http://www.christiananswers.net/q-aig/aig-c010.html
Genesis 7:11 says that on the day the flood began, there was a "breaking up" of the fountains, which implies a release of the water, possibly through large fissures in the ground or in the sea floor. The waters that had been held back burst forth with catastrophic consequences.

There are many volcanic rocks interspersed between the fossil layers in the rock record -- layers that were obviously deposited during Noah's flood. So it is quite plausible that these fountains of the great deep involved a series of volcanic eruptions with prodigious amounts of water bursting up through the ground. It is interesting that up to 70 percent or more of what comes out of volcanoes today is water, often in the form of steam.

In their catastrophic plate tectonics model for the flood, Austin et al. have proposed that at the onset of the flood, the ocean floor rapidly lifted up to 6,500 feet (2,000 meters) due to an increase in temperature as horizontal movement of the tectonic plates accelerated.[3] This would spill the seawater onto the land and cause massive flooding -- perhaps what is aptly described as the breaking up of the "fountains of the great deep."

Another great article on the topic:
http://www.icr.org/article/18183/

 

[Lewis]

Psalms 104:6-9 is key, I have mentioned this before here, but anyway, to cause land to appear again. God lowered the earths floor in certain places, and pushed up earth in certain places, causing a water run off. That is why you can find fish fossils on the highest mountains. God changed the whole topography of the earth during this time.

 

[MorgWolfsong]

[quote="Dalen Naskiel":a8deb]In my opinion, I still don't think that the arc held two of every single animal there was in the whole world. I think it was the animals around the region of the area. Maybe only two of every cattle, sheep, horses, and maybe just a few others. Also, I think that the arc wasn't as huge as the Bible claims. Lastly, it might of been just a flood of the Nile and some other rivers that lasted many more days then usual, because God just made it flood and rain constantly. Because it was way back in time, the people might of thought it was flooding all over the earth when it was just around that region. I still think God played a huge role in this though.

I believe in alot of the Bible stories, just not word for word. I still think there has to be some logic. Though I still believe in God over logic

Well that tells me that you do not believe God's Word, and you are what we call a skeptic. And also there was only one land mass at that time, and the Bible says that God caused all the animals to come to Noah. And let me see here, I am doing this from memory. The Ark was 450 feet long and 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. 500 railroad box cars could fit in it, and there was no other bigger sea vessel until the early 19th century. And like I said it was just one large land mass at that time, the flood was world wide. Take a look at eastern South America and western Africa and you can still see that they were connected at one time. And one more thing you just can't believe some of the Bible, you have to believe the whole Bible. [/quote:a8deb]


now lewis how many different religions in christianity separated from the main religion because of disputes on interpretation of the bible?

you cant say someone isn't a christian just because they don't believe every passage literally that is just your interpretation and beliefs about your religion

 

[Lewis]

now lewis how many different religions in christianity separated from the main religion because of disputes on interpretation of the bible?

you cant say someone isn't a christian just because they don't believe every passage literally that is just your interpretation and beliefs about your religion

You are kidding me right ?

 

[Vic C.]

Gabbylittleangel, you aren't Lewis!...are you? :-D

Ok, from what you and Lewis posted, we ruled out continental drift. 8-)

I think we're getting off topic maybe... unless anyone cares to continue. It seems to be where this topic headed and I guess it's related to the flood. :smt102

 

[Relic]

now lewis how many different religions in christianity separated from the main religion because of disputes on interpretation of the bible?

you cant say someone isn't a christian just because they don't believe every passage literally that is just your interpretation and beliefs about your religion

You are kidding me right ?

:

Lewis,

Did you notice?

He's from the "twisted" Forest.

Notice the information in the side bar:

MorgWolfsong
123 Christian Friend

Joined: 01 Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Location: The twisted Forest

;-) :P


.

 

[Lewis]

Well vic this stuff went down during the flood. Yes relic I noticed.