So you see, the global flood seems still reasonable to me as happening.
Sure, as long as you don't consider any actual geological or climatological evidence, and make outlandish stuff up like God blowing the excess flood water into outer space.
Did Noah really build an ark?
by frogit 67 Replies latest watchtower bible
-
Leolaia
-
Sentinel
No, he made his sons do all the work.
/<
-
Sentinel
Oh, and are you referring to "THE flood", "A" flood, "Another flood"? Apparently someone built a big boat, possibly the first cruiseliner. Did the entire earth become covered and only a handful of "blessed" people survive? Perhaps in a very small area of civilization it might be somewhat conceivable; but I seriously doubt it. I'm certain there were/are areas of the world continue to flood since the appearance of man, and geology has proven this through soil samples, etc.
The thing is, even if the earth was at one time completely covered with water, it was not a time when human beings were even being considered as inhabitants. Perhaps at some point in time, the earth was populated by very large creatures, and the polar ice-caps melted and they were destroyed. The earth has gone through so many cataclysmic changes. We were not always here when those things occured, although perhaps the first couple of "humanoids" were here a bit at the tale end of the "dinasaur age".
Humans with souls "in the image of the creators" came along very late in the creation process. There are cycles to everything created. The earth was born, and changed many times. We came along and the earth is still changing, but time moves differently for us, and we can't always "see" it. The earth will also die at some point. The divine beings know this, but our minds cannot comprehend such things.
/<
-
mineralogist
who was Noah?
-
JCanon
Sure, as long as you don't consider any actual geological or climatological evidence, and make outlandish stuff up like God blowing the excess flood water into outer space.
Look this is not "outlandish". The flood itself was a MIRACLE. After all, if we presume the water canopy was up there under some natural laws, then God had to intervene with something to change it. The canopy appears to have been "solid" and thus I'm presuming it was solid ice in orbit around the planet. This had to be melted. The 7 days after Noah entered the ark suggests it took seven days to melt the ice canopy and convert it into rain cloud. But you can imagine if the skies are black with local storms it must have been totally black approaching the end of those seven days until the canopy was converted to clouds. But that would presume that either something protective was removed, or God caused an explosion on the sun that heated the canopy.
Considering that going on, it's not outlandish at all, needing to get rid of the excess water that god would not have found a way to spew it into outer space. The Bible says he used "winds" to dissipate the water. Maybe it was desert-hot air that evaporated the water into steam clouds and then that was sucked out into outer space. I don't know. All I know is that THERE IS MOISTURE IN OUTER SPACE in the vicinity of the solar system!!! Earth as a source of that water is one explanation, a SCIENTIFIC explanation that works.
Sorry but the flood "myth" does involve some miraculous intervention, meaning things that are supernatural; manipulation of natural laws that we observe. We're not trying to explain it as a "natural occurring" event. So in contrast to "outlandish" let me just say that if God wanted to, he could have had each of the angels come down with a bucket and dip that in the water and carry that out into outer space to get rid of the water, if you PREFER. But the Bible says God used "winds" and since water spouts come under that category, I didn't EXCLUDE it. Maybe it was hust heated air that vaporized the water and then dissipated into outer space. ??? If that's more believable for you then go with that. I personally like the waterspout idea myself, but that's me.
JC
-
JCanon
Sure, as long as you don't consider any actual geological or climatological evidence,
Oh yes, and about the GEOLOGICAL and CLIMATOLOGICAL evidence. Science thinks that anything it hasn't discovered yet means it didn't exist. But science is a limited tool for examining certain things. If there is a mountain and I blow it up and remove all the dirt and make a flat surface from what remains, will there be evidence of that mountain geologically? No. Geology can only examine what is LEFT.
With that limited amount of looking, I've heard there were sea shells found on top of mountain tops and that in Siberia there is evidence of a tropical climate and sudden freezing. So there is likely just as much pro-Flood theory as anti-flood theory out there, so so much for evidence and interpretation of the evidence.
One thing for sure, GOD cannot be perceived by science entirely. You see science does not look at the ARTISTIC aspect of God nor the ABSTRACT. It can't comprehend emotions, beauty, morality or any of these things we know and understand on the other side of our brains. To perceive God we must use BOTH sides of our brains, not just one. When you try to use science as the end-all last word for definiing what is real then you will come up with a short answer, though simply looking at the skies above us, the stars and the planets, even the moon in all it's beauty and it's orbit should tell you it didn't just happen by accident. But some people think it could have, given enough zillion of years, right? What an incredible ACCIDENT we're all part of: Life on the Earth in all it's beauty and complexity, all here without any intellectual intervention of a higher being than ourselves? Now that is UN-SCIENTIFIC if ever.
So thanks, but no thanks. I can tell there is "something else" beyond science going on here. I may not have all the answers, but I sure know science doesn't have all the capabilities of asking enough of the right questions.
If there is truly a god who created the incredible universe, then a global flood on this tiny little planet and the after clean-up isn't going to be that big of a deal for him.
Hey, I think it's a GAMBLE!!! What if there is no god? Then fine, what have you lost? Live your life as long as you can, hopefully don't get hit by a truck or a train and if you get cancer hopefully it's after you're 99. Then die and that's it. But if there IS a God, why not do what he says as found in the bible JUST IN CASE, that way, if the Bible is right, you have a chance at LIFE ETERNAL.
How about:
"I'd rather be SAVED than sorry?"
Finally, just in case I'm right though...you can't claim you weren't warned and nobody told you. So your own life is is your own hands. Don't blame God or Jesus if he turns out to be real and throws the non-believers into the lake of fire. hmmmmm
JC
-
Dansk
Professor Ian Gibbons, biologist at Flinders University, provided a "biological viewpoint of Noah's Ark":
"The Ark needed to carry 5,000 species of mammals; birds 8,700; molluscs 120,000; worms 30,000; etc. All "clean beasts" would include 25,000 fish! All "creepings things" would include 30 million insects! The column of beetles marching into the Ark would have been 240 kilometres long!
Survival of pathogens/bacteria/parasites required each human on board to carry 100 diseases from anthrax to syphilis! Viruses supplied 400 diseases!
And what about waste disposal? Oxygen requirements through only one window? Methane production poisoning the air? Precise food and environmental requirements for all species? Disembarkation onto a dead earth?"
-
Leolaia
Were you trying to argue against what I said, or make my point?
Because you just said in your two posts that
- You believe that empirical evidence is of little value in assessing whether a global Flood is "reasonable" as a historical event, and that scientific "interpretation" of geological and climatological evidence is of little consequence.
- Your "outlandish" theory of what happened is not outlandish because the Flood was a miracle, so essentially anything could have happened, and thus without any knowledge about the physics and dynamics of waterspouts, winds, cosmic forces, etc. you can simply speculate on what might have happened, and that is of greater merit than what ice cores, tree rings, geological strata, and countless other types of empirical evidence might say about what happened in earth's past.
Having little knowledge of areas of scientific expertise, it is easy for you to speculate wildly about what could have happened without facing evidence of what did happen and how things can happen. It's like being on a jury during a murder trial and saying, "Oh, the forensic evidence could be interpreted in all sorts of ways, these experts seem to think they know what blood splatter, DNA, and fingerprints mean, but I don't know anything about these areas, and I think it's all just their interpretations. I think it is just as likely that Satan murdered the victim, as proven by the victim saying "My God, help me!" when he was killed, and anyway Satan could've made things look like someone else did it anyway, since the murder was done through his supernatural powers -- essentially being a miracle. This seems just as likely as whatever these scientific 'forensic experts' make up, since they don't know anything about Satan and do not realize that he is the cause of evil things like murder on this earth."
-
PinTail
Well check this out about Noahs Ark:
-
toreador
What I want to know is this.
If the water canopy was a good thing when God created it in the first place, why would he destroy it just to kill people off?
If God is a benevolent God, why destroy millions of animals by drowning them when obvioulsy it was only the humans that God was displeased with?
If all humans acted in the way God is supposed to have acted in the flood story the world would be in a worse state than it is in right now.
Here are some cool ways God could have did it.
Jeremiah 19:9 ***
9 And I will make them eat the flesh of their sons and the flesh of their daughters; and they will eat each one the flesh of his fellowman, because of the tightness and because of the stress with which their enemies and those seeking for their soul will hem them in.??
Ezekiel 5:10-11 ***
10 ???Therefore fathers themselves will eat sons in the midst of you, and sons themselves will eat their fathers, and I will execute in you acts of judgment and scatter all the remainder of you to every wind.11 ??Therefore as I am alive,? is the utterance of the Sovereign Lord God
Leviticus 26:28-29 ***
28 I shall then have to walk in heated opposition to YOU, and I, yes, I, shall have to chastise YOU seven times for YOUR sins. 29 So YOU will have to eat the flesh of YOUR sons, and YOU will eat the flesh of YOUR daughters.
Deuteronomy
11. The LORD shall smite thee in the knees, and in the legs, with a sore botch that cannot be healed, from the sole of thy foot unto the top of thy head.-- 28:35
12. And thou shalt eat the fruit of thine own body, the flesh of thy sons and of thy daughters.-- 28:53
13. So that he will not give to any of them of the flesh of his children whom he shall eat.-- 28:55
14. The tender and delicate woman among you, which would not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil toward the husband of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter, and toward her young one that cometh out from between her feet, and toward her children which she shall bear: for she shall eat them.-- 28:56-57
15. I will heap mischiefs upon them. I will spend mine arrows upon them.-- 32:23
16. They shall be burnt with hunger, and devoured with burning heat, and with bitter destruction: I will also send the teeth of beasts upon them, with the poison of serpents of the dust.-- 32:24
Jeremiah For, behold, I will send serpents, cockatrices, among you, which will not be charmed, and they shall bite you, saith the LORD.--8:17
Zechariah Their flesh shall consume away while they stand upon their feet, and their eyes shall consume away in their holes, and their tongue shall consume away in their mouth.--14:12