$120 million dollars later.....

I didn't watch the video,....but what group do the protestors represent?

Idiots

thanks for posting.

lot's of differing ideas out there, and that's ok.

it's good to take into account all the differing ideologies.

jesus and his crowd has been here some 2,000 years of time.

the allah people (islam) have been here some 1500 years of time.

the ark is more about judaism than anything else, right?

the mosquitos, ticks, chiggers & fleas survived?

I think those folks are all fools, one side for actually believing the Ark myth and the other for wasting time protesting. As for the state helping finance it, it looks like they'll get a good return on their investment.

As for trying to refute the Ark story with science, I have learned that there is no point in trying to do so, or trying to refute science with religion.

Watch the video, 5 min, isn't long. I have no problem with them building it. I don't believe it is historically accurate, but that is OK too. If I'm in the area I'd probably see it. But I think it was wrong to spend tax money to help build it.

That's what the protest was over, the tax money used to help build it.

I say let them build it (minus the tax payer money). Sometimes the best thing you can do to defeat an argument is let the other side speak, or in this case, build their ark.

Another religious controversy thread?

The only kind Starman can get any hits on.

I just wanna be there when they launch the thing!!!

Only two questions:
1) How many rod holders
2) fuel burn at W.O.T.

I'm just wondering why the bow and stern are shaped like it's a powerboat for going somewhere...

This reminds me of the warning my granddaddy gave me about mud wrestling pigs. Everyone gets dirty but the pig likes it. carry on.

Isn't this a 2 year old event, or is there another Ark now?

Bigger than I'd imagined.

Friggen huge.

At least two years ago, but Starman still has dial up internet access, to the video just finished downloading for him.

If that is built to actual (biblical, as far as we can tell) size - It is MUCH larger than I envisioned - and MUCH closer to what I mentally, thought needed!

If I remember correctly, it's only like a 3/4 scale model of Biblical dimensions. They didn't have enough space to make if full sized.

that is a hebraic representation of the way things were. and that's good. we all know that the christians and the hebrews have much in common.

it was a kind of common heritage until there was a shift, or change in direction?

someone invested a lot of money, and hopefully the system is a money-maker?

Dinosaurs

1. The fish are already in the boat.
2. It’s powered by slaves.

I have always read that the ark was some 450 feet long (300 cubits) the model in question is 510 feet,
maybe because of the modern extended bows?...

then there are all kind of variance in ancient cubit measures...

Hebrew (short) 17.5 inches
Egyptian 17.6 inches
Common (short) 18 inches
Babylonian (long) 19.8 inches
Hebrew (long) 20.4 inches
Egyptian (long) 20.6 inches

the thing has a lot of concrete pumped into it as well, Gods building codes were different to Kentuckys..

its makers claim dinosaurs , but also claim they have no idea what type tools Noah used.

giant lizards had the giant fleas to match...

https://www.livescience.com/20031-giant-flea-insect-pest-plagued-dinosaurs.html


Scale of dinosaurs to the original ark concept...
https://mythinkblots.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/noahs_ark_dinos_to_scale.jpg

apart from an ark bulging with all such creatures, imagine the many tons of feed required for all
of them each day,....where did Noah store it......???

The Bible says it was 450' long and 75' wide. It says nothing about the shape, though. I seriously doubt that it had pointed ends. It just needed to be a big box that would float around with God's guidance. No propulsion or guidance needed. Nobody knows, of course, but my guess would be that it looked more like this.

Dinosaurs were extinct 40 million years ago.

It's sad that Christians would be duped by by atheist con artists that Noah had dinosaurs on the Ark.

I don't think the Old Testament says anything about feet.

A cubit is estimated to have been about 18". It was 300 cubits long and 50 wide. But I'm sure you already knew that.

Well,

18" is one of about a dozen estimates for the length of a cubit. 18" is the "modern cubit", which is a convenient approximate of the median of the various possible length for the ancient cubits.

So there'd be room for 2 of every species of land animal there's ever been?

Lets see now, there's about 5400 species of mammal extant, so there's 11,000 animals right off the bat. But there's been many more which are now extinct. Many also only found in places remote from Noah, some separated from him by oceans at the time.

And then there's the better part of 20,000 reptiles, plus all of those now extinct. Quite a few flightless birds, including a whole raft of them up to quite massive sizes away on the other side of the world in New Zealand. And then there's dinosaurs and insects and all the rest.

It sure must have been crowded!

Have attendance met expectations?

The vast amount of unrecognized presupposition illustrated here is again almost unbelievable. To begin with, the billions of years old earth is based on philosophical science (not empirically proven) begun primarily in the early 19th century in Europe, accepted, and built on by Darwin with his ORIGINS mid-century. And now taught worldwide, formally, for decades as hard, settled science.

But wait you say, radio isotope dating proves it all. Not quite. Carbon-14 dating? Not necessarily. As to the former, determining the time for “daughter material” to decay from “mother material” is based on a presently known rate of decay (hard science), there are multiple presuppositions used to interpret the answer in years; for one, that the rate of decay has always been the same — uniformitarianism. It might have varied greatly. Greatly.

The earth could be relatively young. There might have been a supercontinent (one land mass) broken up by a world-wide flood followed by an ice age that that resulted in dinosaurs and other mammals becoming extinct. This flood might have resulted in many extinct animals being found as if they had been buried fast and violently. Exihibit A: wooly mammoths intact with food still in there mouths and still intact DNA.

As to the ark holding all of these creatures (dinosaurs) — they needn’t have been adults but rather the very young.

And on and on. A lot of pseudo-science snake oil has been given and swallowed.

Edited to add some references: see works by Jonathon Sarfati PhD and Henry Morris PhD (particularly, the GENESIS FLOOD). And there are many others.

Interesting thought. But let us consider dinornis species, of which there were several. They were extant in huge numbers in NZ, to the extent that there are whole reefs of their bones. No record or trace of them in the Middle East though, nor outside NZ. So how was it that they could get on the Ark, survive the trip, breed back up again, but yet leave no trace outside NZ?

In fact how do you account for species for which there is ample evidence in locations like Australia, or NZ, or Madagascar, or other locations, but none at all, not even relatives, in the Middle East? How do you account for the Wallace line?

And how do you account for the fact that peoples recorded some species but not others? For example, in Australian cave and other art there's ample evidence for species extant in Australia currently or over the past few thousand years, like roos and wombats and barramundi and turtles and snakes and such, but none for dinosaurs, despite their existence as fossils here. There's little to none of extinct megafauna either. The same in Europe - plenty of cave paintings of deer and elk, and aurochs and the like, but none of dinosaurs. You'd think that folks would have noticed them!

And you know this as fact?

Nevertheless, let's say they were...no need then to speculate how they would fit into the ark...right?

I always forget how the Penguins got to Noah's boatyard?

I had to drive past the theme park for a number of years. Things might have changed, but it wasn't a such a hot deal then or now. Gobs of money got thrown at this project, and nobody showed up.

Hey Gus,
The period of the Old Testament is considered a time of preparation and prophesy of the Messiah. The New Testament time is considered the fulfillment of the prophesy. So it all runs together hence "Judeo-Christian". Always comes up with kids and the ark story, "Did they hafta include the mosquitoes?"

Evangelicals don't agree, they have put their 'faith' in the science of C-D.

'2010, evangelical Chinese and Turkish researchers claimed to have found wooden remnants from an “ark-like” structure
around 13,000 feet up Agri Mountain, the highest peak in Turkey,...
They said that carbon dating had revealed the wood to be around 4,800 years old, which conceivably places it in the same
historical period as when the flood was said to have occurred.'

https://www.csmonitor.com/World/Glo...nd-by-claim-of-Noah-s-Ark-find-in-Turkey

All alleged ark discoverers over the years have all turned out to be hoaxes, with people planting false evidence
to support their claims, and also keeping the location of the ark [and the universities that did their analysis]... a secret.

The more rational minded christians have called out such hoaxes.
and more rational minded christians have also said the story of the ark is allegorical.[ ie; purely mythical-symbolic]




I could at a wild stretch understand caring parents escorting their young lizards to the ark, and telling them to get on
for their own good,...but not pairs of youngster creatures from all over the globe making the trek by themselves....

The ark did look like a shoe box much like what you have here and not like the fairy tale shape this one copies out of children's sunday school books. What a waste of time and money.

I read something about the proportions that God gave for this project. The article stated that a vessel this shape and proportions would be the most stable and seaworthy possible. Basically, it was perfect for the task.

Bible does not say the Ark must be a rectangular box.....Scripture does not elaborate about the shape of Noah’s Ark
beyond overall proportion.

The Bible leaves the details regarding the shape of the Ark wide open, the Ky. model may share a similar bow design
to the biblical ark or it may not, nobody really knows.

Mesopotamian pottery from the era not long after the flood, picture vessels with certain aspects of the Ky. design ark.

maybe the savvy Mesopotamia shipwright guys copied the ark cause it was the only ship known to survive...

flood the world is probably a much different concept to people living in B.C., - maybe 4/5 of the world was unknown to them, nor which species existed beyond their natural borders.

It made a story like the ark much more believable I'm sure

Noah is a big deal in Islam too, perhaps they can alter their marketing strategies.

That’s pretty cool except for the dinosaurs. I don’t recall Noah mentioning them in the Old Testament.

And if I’d have been Noah, we wouldn’t have any rattlesnakes today

Men.... explaining miracles!?!?!?!?!?

Yeah. Only Disney should get tax incentives.

Exactly.

Of course the news man doesn't take time to explain those tax incentives are given for the purposes of stimulating the economy.

And let's not mention that if you view it as a church, every fugking church gets enormous tax breaks. This one just happens to be in the shape of an old ass boat.

It has exceeded them. First year 325,000 were expected, a little over 1 million attended. They're on there way to 1.5 to 2 million coming up.

Hotels and restaurants are apparently booming. Can't be having all that and tax incentives. Not when there needs to be more rainbow crosswalks painted in Lexington and millions of dollars spent tearing done Confederate memorials.

I'd want a bit of a bow, it would allow it to hold a 'course', not swing around willy nilly.

I’ll try.

For entertainment’s sake assume the Biblical record is true..as far as it goes; that is, it gives us a broad outline within which we can do some speculating and filling in the story. Although much less speculating is needed now than before because of various discoveries.

The earth (I’ll stay local) is 6-10k years old judging from the creation account and moving forward by the Biblical genealogies as given in Genesis and Luke to name two accounts. The account in Luke is claimed by some to have some gaps which extend the age from six thousand to possibly ten thousand. But who’s quibbling?

It is questioned that the world-wide Flood (the pouring from above and the fountains breaking forth from below) was such a catastrophic event that the world we see post-flood is completely different than the antediluvian environment. Pre-flood, the world might have been one giant land mass— a super continent of a semi-tropical, or moderate climate, shrouded in a radiation-deflecting atmosphere (perhaps one reason the antediluvians were so long-lived (Noah didn’t start building the ark until he was three hundred years old and lived into the 600’s). Radiation decay rates of radiometric materials rate might have greatly varied and increased during this time giving us these false numbers today based on uniformitarianism — the concept underlying modern geology and which holds all things have continued on from old at the same slow rate. Another words, today’s decay rate is the same as five thousand years ago, the same as ten million years ago. That has not been and cannot be proven.

So there were no poles; no penguins for example. There were general “kinds” (Biblical term) then of much greater genetic information and much fewer in number than species now. The kinds, for example were the “bear kind”, the “dog kind” etc, which when the continents separated, and the ensuing ice age came resulted in specific species by environmental selective breeding (or survival). We can do that now selectively, artificially, in large animals, creating a different (not species) breed in several hundred years time.

So Noah didn’t have to load as many animals up as some here say. And since this was all supernaturally done anyway, God moved these creatures to the ark. Noah watched.

The ark was speculated to be barge-like as it didn’t have to sail but just float and a rectangular shape affords a much more efficacious use of space than a vessel with a tapered bow or stern.

I would suggest reading of Genesis and Henry Morris’ THE GENESIS FLOOD. Of course this is the young earth view. Not all Christians are young-earthers.

It didn't need to hold a course. There was nowhere to go and no propulsion was needed to go nowhere. It only needed to stay afloat for a year. The simplest design that did that would have been the best.

I drive by it quite often - or at least the exit for it. IIRC its pretty close to the Kentucky Speedway and there are some supporting business that have popped up around it - Zipline, a couple of restaurants, etc

I don't have any desire to see it but I think the larger plan has been for this to be an anchor to develop other family oriented attractions.

Also, Cincinnati is home to the creation museum so the two kind of go hand in hand in their target demographic.

Those who believe the Ark story was meant to be taken as a literal event in history that encompassed the entire planet are those who have zero interest in, or (alternatively) ability to learn, the fundamentals of the life sciences.

I believe they just finished it, at least to the point they can show it.

They claim that they didn't have to have every species. They claim that, for example, one species of cat could have been preserved on the ark, and then once off the ark, could have then divided into the many species of both big and small cat we know today. Same with canids, etc.. Preposterous, of course, since ancient civilizations recorded many of those species existing as they do today right around the period of time that the world-wide flood was supposed to have happened and thereafter. Assuming, even, that the flood happened just before those records, that's pretty rapid division and change in a species, from tiny cats, to the pumas, tigers, leopards, lions, etc.., not to mention the many we only know from the fossil record.

There are scientific proofs of massive flooding all over the world. Entire mammoths have been unearthed with food still undigested in their stomachs. Look at the Grand Canyon, it was a flood, not over millions of years. Look at where the coal and oil deposits are. Flooding placed them there. It says in the Bible, that there were no seasons before the flood. The seasons started afterward. Probably a giant asteroid hit the earth hard enough to cause it to wobble on its axis causing the seasons, and massive flooding and climate change, like tsunamis, and rain. It also says the animals were herbivores, not carnivores, before the flood. Panda bears eat bamboo, even though they are capable of digesting meat. Massive deposits of fossil animals have been found world wide indicating massive flooding. Every civilization from India, China, Middle East, Egypt, all tell of massive flooding stories.

You’re starting to sound like a Floridian.

Really!? How can you be so sure of what you don’t know?

About those frozen mammoths...They've found some so intact that the meat was still edible. They've eaten it, in very small morsels, of course. They've also found blooming,undigested flowering plants in their stomachs. You guys are all hunters. You all know about freezer burn. It's preventable by completely eliminating air from the meat. An excellent method is to immerse it in water and freeze it. It will last many years that way if kept frozen. The mammoth meat was immersed in water which froze, preserving them nicely. However, that leaves the problem of the flowers they were eating. The climate was warm enough for flowers to bloom so how did they get encased in ice? Plus, they had to have been immersed and frozen before the meat spoiled. From warm to sub-zero in maybe 2 or 3 days?

Something catastrophic had to have happened all across the northern high latitudes to dramatically drop the temperatures and cover the animals with water at the same time, all in a few days time before the meat spoiled. The Bible describes the pre-flood earth as having been surrounded by a moisture cover. It says that up to the time of the flood, it had never rained. A sudden breakdown of that layer of moisture, dumping all that water to the ground, would cause rapid evaporation which would cool it fast, possibly enough to change a warm greenhouse climate to the arctic climate we have today.

everybody knows Jesus was metric!

Maybe 510 feet?


https://arkencounter.com/noahs-ark/size/




P

It's not important what people "know" of Jesus, it is important if Jesus knows them.

Practice.

Ol' Noah woulda schit his robes if he saw some of the Royal Caribbean ships afloat today.

Why? They could have spent that money on beer and bbq!

Coming from a Jewish Rabi of some influence, I'll summarize it.:

It is not to say that the story told through Moses is factually true, the Torah is not a history book. It is to say that the words are as given by God to Moses. Are they actually true, partly true, based on historical facts, is the question. Or are they given to convey a message of faith and guidance, much the same as a Christian would view a parable of Jesus? The Torah is not a history book, it is a book of theology and faith.

The OT is written in different, original Hebrew language genres — poetry, prophecy, and history to name three. The best Hebrew scholars (ie, James Barr, Oxford) have determined that Genesis is written in the historical genre; in other words, real history, real people, real occurrences.

So you, in your wisdom have decided that this history is not literal. By what standard? What else do you believe is not literal?
The virgin birth? Christ as God incarnate? The resurrection? The ascension? Why bother?

The fundamentals of life science? The fundamentals? — that is actually pretty funny.

No access to a dictionary??

If the story of the arc is true,

- Why did God include roaches and mosquitoes on it?
- Why didn't he include a couple of dinosaur species?
- How did Noah handle the cobras and black mambas?
- Did he include pairs of homosexuals, lesbians and transgenders?
- etc.

Curious minds want to know.

Ah, the dictionary. You need to read beyond one. There is actually more available.

LMFAO

You need your own YouTube channel.

You should not try to prove matters of faith using science, especially if you don't understand the science. For instance:

"There are scientific proofs of massive flooding all over the world." No there aren't. There are instances of localized flooding.

"Mammoths." These have been reliably dated long before any possible date for Noah's flood.

"Look at the Grand Canyon, it was a flood, not over millions of years. Look at where the coal and oil deposits are." No reputable geologist would agree with you on this.

Probably a giant asteroid hit the earth hard enough to cause it to wobble on its axis causing the seasons..." If that happened (which it did, we think, about 4 billion years ago) the impact would melt the earth into molten lava, taking millions of years to cool.

"...the animals were herbivores, not carnivores, before the flood." Hardly. Lions etc. cannot digest vegetable food. Their teeth are wrong and their intestines are too short.

I'd say you're living proof that he did.

Well, science and faith do not exactly contradict each other. The fact is that there are great flood stories from around the world. Look at Genesis 7:11- In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, on the seventeenth day of the second month--on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.

Well, lets look at what some scientist believe may have happened around 2800-3000 BCE. That would be the Burckle Crater in the deep Indian Ocean. Note the location of that crater:



This I take from my memory of a paper I read some years ago, and it seems plausible to me:

When something like that hits several things happen. One being a massive tidal wave thousands of feet high. Also would be an incredible amount of ejected sea water in the form of mostly super heated steam. That ejected sea water would condense and come down like rain.

But more than that. We know from deep water nuclear testing that the water pulsates until the energy is dissipated. It ends because there is no more energy being added to the reaction. But in this case the floor of the ocean, and some of the material closer to the core, would be super heated. Now when the water returns it super heats and the reaction is driven. It still runs until the energy is dissipated but that takes a much longer time than a comparative firecracker that would be a nuclear warhead.

Now note that the Middle East is directly inline with that impact, and is not very high above sea level. Now the question becomes the statement of "The entire world". Does it mean the entire planet OR the world known to the people in that region. Just like the animals, does it mean all the animals on the planet or just the animals of that region?

Note that the torah is about the Jewish people and their fore-bearers. While it applies to all men and teaches all men, it is specifically aimed at that group.

On another topic, I firmly believe that Genesis 2 is not a repeat or expansion on Genesis 1. How much time passed between the two is an unknown.

LIke I said,
Just let them talk:

How long was a God day or year?
And who can confirm that based on what? Since none of us was
around back then during those 6 days he got busy making stuff.

Cool ship...
Tidal wave connection with it somehow I geuss
just don't jive based on construction time versus impact.

Unless Noah got some inside info on stuff fixing to go down....

Still puzzled about the tick and chigger and biting or stinging insect thing
I know it is the birds eat em explanation.



Need to see a 6000 yr old earth calendar with picture pages timeline.
Get a kick outta those.

I think the big guy in the sky might be ticked off at man's interpretation
of him at times also.

JMO....

You seem to forget.

According to the Bible narrative EVERYONE in the world except Noah and his family DIED, so there would be no one else anywhere else in the world to record stories of the same alleged world wide flood.


Genesis 6:17 Behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life ... Every thing that is in the earth shall die.

7:14: and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.

&:20 and the mountains were covered.

7:23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

Water covered the highest mountain. Rained for 40 days and 40 nights,


Real nice guy, your God....murdering EVERYONE.

There is no evidence for any so-called Burckle Crater. The only "evidence" is sand dunes in Australia and Madagascar, said to be caused by tsunamis. More recent computer simulations point to the dunes being created by wind erosion.

If there had been such an impact in the Indian Ocean, it would not have caused a world side flood.

Scripture repeatedly tells man to have a sound mind. ..sound rational minds are rather valuable
and useful in dealing with deception and debunking myths.

God regards you as mere sheep, but still hopes they use their minds so as not to allow others to 'pull the wool'
over them..

being spiritual doesn't entitrely require faith without also having logic and reason,
in fact it is an integral/essential component.

2 Timothy 1:7
'For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind'.

how did you arrive at the figure of one year afloat.?

The beginning of the rain/flood was in the second month (Genesis 7:11) and still took some time
before the waters were high enough to actually float the ark.
Genesis 7:17( KJV)
"And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bare up the ark, and it was lift up
above the earth".

re: actual time AFLOAT...

Genesis 8: (KJV)

3 "And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days
the waters were abated.
4 And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat."


Genesis 8: NLT

3 "So the floodwaters gradually receded from the earth. After 150 days,
4 exactly five months from the time the flood began, the boat came to rest on the mountains of Ararat."

***
note: the Ark became grounded 5 months from when the flood/rains actually began, not from when the Ark
was first floated.

early low level flash flooding likely occurred before rising waters reached the Ark.

Keep reading. It's true that they got grounded after 5 months. However, the rain started when Noah was 600 and 2 months. They left the ark when he was 601 and 1 month. While they were grounded in the 5th month, the 1st land appeared in the 10th month and it was at least another month after that before they could get out.

Even though they were grounded after 5 months, the ark was partially afloat for months longer.

Thanks. It is supposed to be a discussion, right? 😉

God is not man that He should lie. That which He told any man to include in His Story is both Truth and history of then, now or the future.

A Jewish Rabbi of any level of influence has not reconciled the life, death and resurrection of the Son of God, his own Messiah, and therefore has neither the discernment or revelation to understand his own faith fully which has been true of all of that faith and office for over 2,000 years.

Blame God if you like, and you seem to want to, but you seem to forget a few things yourself, like the first few chapters of the Book of Genesis (which you quoted from) where God gave mankind the perfect place to live forever and how man disobeyed his instructions and reaped the consequences from that day forth including what happened at the flood. The world and it's current state is because of man's actions. not God's.

Where'd the get that much gopher wood?

That should have been spelled "go-for" wood.

All I want to know is if it floats?

I have a few questions. Is there a chapel so people may worship? Is there a restaurant (Cracker Barrel would be great) with a gift shop? Is there a petting zoo? Because you can't have an ark without a petting zoo. An enquiring mind would like to know.

These are some good questions.

That includes climate change, right?

i don't wish to afend jaguarman with my questions.

but at some 4500? years ago, the wood supply question is legitimate.

that is, it was bronze age, maybe iron age peoples. the knives, splitters were basic or rudimentary.

building a water tight ship/boat that could withstand a flood for what 40 days, and maybe float for a year?

they might have used saplings, bound together with pitch, tar or something? maybe animal skin?

on the other hand, it had to be bouyant enought to float itself, 8 people and all the animals.

some people have speculated there was a crew member always moving, causing half the animals & birds to jump up, thus reducing the total boat weight by half.

i'll wait on jaguar man to quote chapter & verse.

The climate changed dramatically in Noah's day.

yes, that was the beginning of the change from matriarchy to patriarchy, back in that vicinity.

the world became much more difficult in which humans could survive.

maybe it was over-population, or just difficult at that level of available technology.

but, in any event, the matriarchy was pretty much shut out, and "the garden of eden" was no more.

Do you actually believe yourself, Gus?

You aren't as entertaining as jag and some of the others, but you'll do

me & jag as a team do our best to keep the level of interest up in terms of group discussion. sometimes it's a hit or a miss.

seriously, back in the day it's pretty clear that the earth changes made the earth a much more difficult environment for humans to survive.

whether we tell the story as the emergence of humans from the land of eden, or were forced out, what difference does it make?

eve, eden, whatever.

lilith was laying in wait as soon as humans emerged from the Garden?

but, i'm open for discussion. maybe when the sahara became a desert was involved? big trees & water before that.

humans with minimum developed technology, making a living on the earth, and having offspring.

it was a pretty adaptable bunch at some level of being, no?

Because the perfect all knowing God didn't know what was going to happen ahead of time?

Hurricanes, floods, volcanic eruptions, Tsunami's. How are all of those "because of man's actions"?

I think it's Yes to all of the above.

You're the expert. You read it for yourself.

You made the claim.

Lets here you defend it.

You're the one who made the claim (see above) and I did defend it. God doesn't need my defence anyways so rail away.

BTW ..... The only ones that God murdered are those that thumbed their noses at him in disobedience.

I guess you missed the quotes about the flood drowning everyone, and everything that was not on the arc?

Nope ... I didn't miss that. I've read it several times.

What you missed was the the whole world was warned of what was going to happen. They mocked God and ignored those warnings. We all deserve to die for our disobedience.

Grounded but partially afloat for much longer?....Genesis 8 does not say that.



Genesis does not say they couldn't physically get out...rather Noah was not permitted to disembark until
all flood waters had receded and the whole earth was dry and had permission from God.....ie;
only when things were all back to complete normal.

Genesis 8:13-16
.And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month,
the waters were dried up from off the earth:....and, behold, the face of the ground was dry.
14 And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dried.
15 And God spake unto Noah, saying,
16 Go forth of the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.

***
Waiting for ALL flood waters to be dried up from the earth doesn't have to mean the Ark was not
already properly dry grounded for months already.

Genesis 8:


5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month: in the tenth month, on the first day of the month,
were the tops of the mountains seen.

6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made:

7 And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.

8 Also he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground;

9 But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters
were on the face of the whole earth:


***

Tops of the mountains can be seen in genesis 8:5, then in 8:9 the dove cannot find any ground
because the earth is still totally covered.

which simply means waters had not receded enough to practically disembark people and animals
to allow them to go and disperse on their purposeful way, ..but the Ark may well have been high and dry
for months already....especially if the Ark had grounded on the highest part of the mountains.

Then from that high dry vantage point, Noah was then (in the 10th month) now able to see newly exposed
areas of the lower peaks/ridges.

I think the garden remained intact after Adam & Eve were ejected, but the flood would have wiped it out...
and I don't know of the garden having any ship berthing facilities for a 300 cubit Ark.



How did God or Noah go about warning every inhabitant on the globe?
Where in scripture does God or Noah give any direct flood warning to the people?

I only know of God warning Noah and nobody else. (Hebrews 11:7)

Matthew 24:

37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be.
38 For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage,
until the day that Noe entered into the ark,
39 And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be".

***
Even If they had issued a warning that many then decided to heed, how would so many earthly inhabitants
fit inside the Ark..?....construction plans( ie; size) for the Ark were already established by God.
and God didn't ask Noah or anyone else to build more Arks.

God had decided to drown them all and thats that.!

I have heard Christians often say Noah was mocked and ridiculed when building the ark, but I cannot find
any scripture to support such claim.

He uses a Christian concept to judge The Being Who doesn't exist. Yo the casual observer he appears irrational.

So kill yourself. Personally, I'm going to wait awhile.

God had shut the door from the outside. There's no mention of an inside door knob.
Gen 8:16 The animals going in were male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the LORD shut him in.

They didn't come out until God told them to. Presumably, God had to open the door since he had closed it from the outside.
Gen 8:16 "Come out of the ark, you and your wife and your sons and their wives.
17 Bring out every kind of living creature that is with you— the birds, the animals, and all the creatures that move along the ground—so they can multiply on the earth and be fruitful and increase in number upon it."

So, did they hire a Chef? and who was in charge of feeding the animals? Where the heck did they store a years worth of animal(s) food?

WOW! +P+



I need to be selling some of you folks some bridges, or ocean front property in Minnesota...

And this part gets missed many times..........................................................

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.

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.

When I was a kid, my older brother's best friend was an Orthodox Jew studying to become a rabbi. My brother wanted to trip him up on Bible trivia, so he said to him, "I've got something that will stump you ... how many pairs of every clean animal did Moses bring on the Ark?" My brother's friend jumped at the chance to display his thorough knowledge of the fine points of the Torah, and proudly declared that the correct answer was seven. My bother then responded, "Wrong! Moses didn't bring any animals on the Ark." LOL

No need to rush it.We will all get our turn.

Hebrews 9:27 (KJV) " And as it is appointed unto men once to die, but after this the judgment:"

I always figured they gave us that song about Noah and the animals 2x2 to misdirect us. If not, then why didn't it mention some 2x2 and some 7x7?
Must be the case of, if you repeat a lie over and over, ect..................

You're right, it says nothing about Noah being mocked for building the arc. One can only assume that was the case as rain was not seen prior to the flood so why would someone build such a large vessel?

Another point about Noah that is commonly tossed out is that he preached to the masses prior to the flood warning the world of the coming event. This point cannot be found as well.

So if your son brings your car home late you should kill him, or make a torture chamber in your basement and burn him forever, and then everyone else in your town?

Lets take this a step further. How about putting a marshmallow in front of 4 year old, who doesn't know the difference between right and wrong, good and evil, and tell her not to eat it. If she does, then punish everyone for ever for her "original sin".

Why ask more questions when your gross ignorance and complete bias against the subject is glaringly apparent? You have no idea whatsoever what you are talking about and are not willing in any way to have a reasonable discussion.

I will not be trolled further with your diatribe.

just to throw a monkey wrench into the discussion for jaguarman and others benefit:

maybe the physical ark was an "allegory," that is, the best the scribes of the time could do?

maybe the space aliens, the extraterrestrials, the original settlers lifted all the viable dna off the earth?

later, after the cleansing, that is, getting rid of the space alien hybrids that had polluted the human species

the aliens downloaded the human dna, and the animals, birds, reptiles, etc. to a rejuvenated earth and a re-do?

ancient humans recording history did the best they could do with the information that had available to them.

a great cloud of fire coming down on the mtn above moses?

a burning bush talking to moses as he prayed?

the Ark held a nuclear device?

we haven't scratched the surface?

Of course not. That's because I just revealed the inherant immorality of your foundational myths.

Some Bibles say God shut him in... and some say God simply closed the entrance behind him.
no Bible I can find says Noah was completely 'locked' in.

http://biblehub.com/genesis/7-16.htm

Surely there were some access/service doors to allow all the animal and human waste to be ejected overboard
over so many months....God is still a common sense practical God.

and below we see Noah was able to gain access to the outside world by opening some part of the ark himself....
i have not read anywhere in scripture that God unlocked [or was required to unlock] the ark for him.

Genesis 8:13
"And it came to pass in the six hundredth and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up
from off the earth: and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and, behold, the face of the ground was dry."


****
back to earlier post...

like all the 8:4 references in this link: http://biblehub.com/genesis/8-4.htm ....KJV also uses the word rest;

Genesis 8:4 "And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat."

[Rest in the dictionary] means to; cease movement , be motionless, to stay in a specific position, free of disturbance, etc
when you bury people you lay them to rest...when a ship sinks to the ocean floor , its said to to 'come to rest' on the ocean floor.

and my first hand experience in ships tells me a ship at rest is a ship thats not floating or bobbing around like a cork.
When we put vessels into dry dock, they came to rest motionless on stands as the water was pumped out,
Even when some water was still lapping part of the hull, the vessels were already still-motionless, because there was no longer
enough water to make the hull buoyant in anyway.

8;4 is the only place God mentions the ark coming to rest, by that I reasonably gather that is the time the hull became unaffected
by the waters....I cannot find scriptural evidence to suggest the hull kept floating around for months more after coming to rest
on the mountain.

For all the carnivores onboard, did Noah butcher other creatures for them,?...or just feed live animals to them..?

either way , he must have had a large store of 'food source' live animals aboard to cover a 12 month period.
But Bible doesn't talk about them, or how he got them.

Some Christians rattle off that Noah had a store of dried/salted meat...or fed them all a vegetarian diet.

how one would get T-Rex and his meat eating lizard cousins and the likes of sabre-tooth tigers to live off such
I do wonder...




I think the 'clean' creatures were the ones suitable for human consumption and sacrifice....
.....Noah also lived before the giving of the Law, anyones guess how Noah knew which animals were clean vs unclean.

What of the plants? How did they survive months of inundation? And if they all died, but regenerated from seeds after the water receded, how did Noah's boatload of animals get by in the time it would take for that to happen? What, for example, of those animals which depend on tree fruits and tree nuts, products of trees at least several years old?

How did bees survive, in the absence of flowering plants?

And how does this story account for those living plants which have been alive since before the date ascribed to this Great Flood? Or those clonal colonies which have been alive since before the Flood without setting seeds?

You cannot reason a person out of something they were never reasoned into.

To all here truly interested, there is a whole new, burgeoning science growing since the late sixties. It’s consists of an apologetic of a young earth, refuting many of the claims of traditional science. These young-earth scientists (many) are all reputable PhD’s from top universities from around the western world.

For some specific answers regarding the flood, Noah, and the ark’s inhabitants, a now recognized definitive and very interesting work on the subject is THE GENESIS FLOOD by Henry Morris PhD (a hydraulic engineer) and John Whitcolm PhD (theologian). This was published back in 1959 and is now considered the cornerstone of this movement.

It’s long, technical, and presents answers, to be sure, speculative, but based on science and probabilities. I highly recommend it.

Edit to add: God in the scriptures gives us but a very broad overview — what is necessary for us to know — but with many unanswered questions that inquiring minds would like to know the answers to. Or at least to entertain them.

First Henry Morris only had a Masters degree, he was not a PHD. In 1963 he formed the Creation Research Society. Here's their statement of beliefs:

All members must subscribe to the following statement of belief:

1. The Bible is the written Word of God, and because it is inspired throughout, all its assertions are historically and scientifically true in the original autographs. To the student of nature this means that the account of origins in Genesis is a factual presentation of simple historical truths.

2. All basic types of living things, including man, were made by direct creative acts of God during the Creation Week described in Genesis. Whatever biological changes have occurred since Creation Week have accomplished only changes within the original created kinds.

3. The great flood described in Genesis, commonly referred to as the Noachian Flood, was an historic event worldwide in its extent and effect.

4. We are an organization of Christian men and women of science who accept Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior. The account of the special creation of Adam and Eve as one man and one woman and their subsequent fall into sin is the basis for our belief in the necessity of a Savior for all mankind. Therefore, salvation can come only through accepting Jesus Christ as our Savior.


In other words, they admit to starting with the conclusion, then trying to justify it.

How many peer review journal articles supporting his statement of beliefs was he able to publish in reputable journals?

No AS, he has a PhD, From the Univ of Minn I believe, in hydraulic engineering. Whitcomb used his effort in co-authoring the book to complete his ThD theses (correction from above).

You must aim before you fire. 😉

Edit: and no, if you would read the book, you would see it is not a circular-reasoning effort such as the one you just completed by declaring it so because you do not want to entertain its reasoning and facts.

AS, you might note the book was published in 1959, four years before the formation of the society, as the book research prompted the founding of it along with many communications from other PhD scientists from the UK, Australia, the US, etc.

Chronology: book — affirmed beliefs — society founded with membership requirements of other PhD and MS scientists/researchers.
Nothing strange there.

Reasonable questions I would think.

If all the earth was covered in water from the flood, where did it recede to? It had to go somewhere. Is there a giant drain plug at the bottom of the ocean that the Big Guy pulled?

Let me pull one example that I scanned here that shows poor understanding and presuppositions upon which you declare God an unjust tyrant. I refer to your referring to Eve as a 14 yo girl and the “illegal” Apple as a “marshmallow” which upon her (and Adam) eating of it caused the Fall of mankind and the incomprehensible unjustness of it all.

First of all any, reference to Eve must depend upon Biblical exposition; that is, Adam and her were created on the 6th day. As the only two people in the then-world and with immediate responsibilities, we can safely presume God created them as adults, perfect adults. For instance, as a 25 yo adult she might have been only five minutes old.

Secondly, the Fall was cataclysmically catastrophic spiritually, physically, and to the environment. Some animals became meat-eaters and the ground now grew thistles and thorns. Adam and Eve, who were created to live forever, might have had “IQ’s” of five hundred and they knew God and walked with Him. In all of this, as perfect, brilliant (?), free moral agents, they were given one one law, one caveat, one restriction. And they failed.

Thus your unjustness of a righteous and perfect God, the creator of everything, fades into reasonable even with limited human understanding.

Apologies if I misread your comment.

They are very reasonable answers and are addressed in the book mentioned above. These things will not be argued to conclusion on the internet. If someone is truly interested, he/she can make a study of it or at least read the book.

If Eve was created from Adam's rib, that would mean that they were related and Cain and Abel were products of incest.

Antelope Sniper is far from ignorant.

He is “ unseeing” as far as a Spiritual Dimension, but so are those who argue for an inerrant bible which can serve as a textbook.

“ Willfully ignorant” best describes those who cling to a conception of God promoted by politicians of a bygone era.

The one unchanging constant in the Bible is NOT God.......... but Human Nature.

One should study the Bible to learn more about Oneself.....not God.......if bible study floats your boat.

Well said.

This can open a can of worms...........serpents you might say.

What would you the "caveat" was? I'm curious what you think.
I believe that whatever it is, you are condemned by it unless you change your thinking.

Not really I think. The “caveat” or condition to eating of the fruit was on the very day you eat of it you shall die (spiritually) and begin dying physically.

The spiritual death could be forgiven by faith, confession and repentance like now. The coming physical death was irreversibly determined like now unless the Second Coming precludes it.

not only that, which means we're all cloned from clones. but also the fact that neither adam nor eve had belly buttons. the rest of us do.

The concept of prohibited incest, does not come about until long after the flood. The logical reason for this is that Adam and Eve were perfect, having perfect genetic makeup, and therefore procreating would not be subject to the genetic defects that came later. As time progressed, those defects accumulated, so procreation of close relatives eventually became a biological problem.

I think it's safe to assume that Noah had knowledge of proper boat construction. And I think it's also safe to assume that God would allow Noah to build a boat that would not be a torturous ride in rough water. For those reasons, I believe the Ark would have resembled a boat more than a box. The box/boat in that drawing would have been a sorry place to spend any time on rough seas - which I would think are pretty likely in such a massive environmental change. As for the shape of the replica in Kentucky.....I'd say it's also a little off.

What about the moral implications about incest?

What moral implications? Where would that have come from?

I'm not sure where they might of come from............spiritual/frequency maybe...............but it must have some kind of affect since Cain killed Abel.

while not a popular theses, but the fact that we had "kill" or violence in our bloodline since very early on, was and has been one of the key ingredients of our human species' success down here on the earth. it's newer better ideas, and technologies overcoming the less effective, efficient and fatal. that allows the better ideas to manifest over poorer, less adaptive ideas. ideas live in human skulls. to allow an idea to flourish, kill off some skulls that house competing ideas. ala, that in large part is what has got us to where we are now down here on the urth.

George, I compared eve to a 4 year old, not a 14 year old. The typical 14 year old girl already has basic understanding of right and wrong, good and evil. From what tree did she eat; the tree of knowledge of good and evil. So regardless of any assertion you make regarding their computational IQ, they still did not posses the knowledge of good in evil, or know right from wrong, so your assertion they were brilliant and perfect but where not morally developed as today's average 14 year old is a non-starter.

As for the morality of the question, we can begin with our own Constitution and the 8th Amendment:
Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted.In addition, we have no history of imprisoning the son for the crimes of the father. Each is held accountable for their own crimes after where the state hold the burden of proof against each specific individual.

Besides, that's presuming any of it is true in the literal sense, you still haven't met the scientific objections to your position above.

And who did Cain and Abel marry?
And Enoch the 3rd son, after one had already been killed built a city before he had any kids....where did all the people come from to populate this "city".

i can only raise my head, and say that i don't know. i think so much of the stuff written by the scribes described the stories they had been told. anything not of this earth could have been called "god" because what else would they have called them.

god walked with adam and eve in the garden? well, true enough, but what were the scribes describing as "god?" well, to them it was god. not of this world, someone or something with infinite technological power over what the herders had. afterall, none had attended gov't school per se. but someone did pass down or share the ability to write on scrolls, tablets, etc. the oral tradition had long been extant. so, speech was an early adaptation. i suppose ancient hebraic language was the one most preferred?

Yea, gotta like 'ol Gene philosophy of focusing on one's self and what you can control first. He kind of has some Buddhist elements to his Christianity.

So, if the only moral implications for incest derive from the implications of birth defects in children, what is your take on the morality of incest between consenting adult close relatives when child birth is not possible?

Gus,

We know the Noah flood story was plagiarized from the Sumerian Epic of Gilgamesh, because we have the cuneiform tablets, as I recall, with one version in the London Museum.

We see similar types of parallels from the Epic of Gilgamesh stories of Enkidu/Shamhat and Adam/Eve. ] In both, a man is created from the soil by a god, and lives in a natural setting amongst the animals. He is introduced to a woman who tempts him. In both stories the man accepts food from the woman, covers his nakedness, and must leave his former realm, unable to return. The presence of a snake that steals a plant of immortality from the hero later in the epic is another point of similarity.

So both stories, the Garden of Eden and Noah's flood are just Hebrew rewrites of earlier Sumerian myths. Parts of Gilgamesh were also borrowed from Epic of Atrahasis, including the Flood myth didn't appear in the oldest version of Gilgamesh, but was added later. Both Epics were written in many version over nearly a millennium with each borrowing from the other along the way, and the Hebrew's later plagiarizing from them. We know this, because we have the texts.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Gilgamesh#See_also

That's a really interesting question. Having not thought on that, my answer will be strictly off the cuff...
My take, and it's mine alone and subject to correction, is that if child birth is truly not possible, then there is no possibility of harm - assuming we're talking about adults acting in freedom, and it's a life long commitment. Someone may be along to correct me, but I can't think of a more appropriate answer.

I know. It sounds strange - but there it is.

Referring back to the "incest" issue - remember that Adam and Eve, and their immediate descendants, lived for hundreds of years. Remember - genetically perfect; ideal environment. They would have had ample time to produce lots of offspring.....and their offspring. Play with "what if" math, and it's easy to see how this works out. And just because Genesis doesn't mention other offspring, doesn't mean they didn't exist. In fact, this very question suggests that there were many other children.

Your answer really isn't all that strange, and sums up the views of Jeremy Bentham, considered my some scholars to be one of the earliest and extreme libertarians. His philosophy revolved around the evaluation of actions in the terms of suffering and harm to others. I have you a simplified version of one of a measure of libertarian sometimes refereed to as a "Bentham Test", which involved something that at least some in our society would consider unacceptable, but didn't involve infliction of harm or suffering on others.

Don't worry, the Conservatives will be along soon to tell you how abjectly immoral you are for your position, but unable to tell you why, not realizing their emotional response is a psychological reaction to their high levels of Disgust Sensitivity. According to Bentham, your is actually the more logical, rational, and unemotional position.

Cain is the 1st child mentioned and probably the majority of Christians will say that he was the 1st born but the Bible doesn't say that. There could have been any number preceding him. There was no prohibition on marrying children or siblings so there could have been quite a few people before Cain was born. In fact, when God expelled him, his concern was that those 'other people' would kill him. There were apparently quite a few by that time.

Read the story in context.

3:24 So he drove out the man; and he placed at the east of the garden of Eden Cherubims, and a flaming sword which turned every way, to keep the way of the tree of life.

4:1 And Adam knew Eve his wife; and she conceived, and bare Cain, and said, I have gotten a man from the LORD.

4:2 And she again bare his brother Abel. And Abel was a keeper of sheep, but Cain was a tiller of the ground.

The story goes straight from being driven from the garden to the birth of Cain, with no mention of intervention centuries of births and the construction of cities etc. Your reading doesn't pass the "sophomore test", i.e. composition and narration skills at least equal to that expected in a sophomore English class. Stretch and twist in the spirit of Ruth Bader Ginsburg as much as you like, but you hypothesis does not pass a plain reading of the text.

there might have been competing colonies of humans placed down here on the earth, from different extraterrestrial colonization attempts. cross-breeding was probably an option, given that everyone came from the same universe, universal creator.

we know that the original orders issued to the hebraic military/priesthood was to kill the heathens, and wipe out their dna.

sounds like competing factions for the control of the land area of the earth, doesn't it?

once again we're into ideology. and we know that ideology lies between the two ears of humans.

They were created perfect and as free moral agents though they had not the experience of evil or sin they had the knowledge of a command to not eat of the fruit of that tree by a God they knew personally.

AS, as to morality and the constitution, it is irrelevant to the question here regarding Adam and Eve.

So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis?

What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection?

the problem as i see it, for us minority adventurers, as i perceive it, is that the alien hypotheses works well right up to the point that someone dares to ask: "well, where did the aliens come from?" that is, what was the process that allowed the aliens (extraterrestrials) to populate the earth?

at that point we're thrown into mental disarray. truely, where did they come from, and why did they choose to colonize earth?

but, assuming they did all of that and for good reason, then my storyline helps explain why the hebrews under direction of the mighty YHWH were such natural borne killers in the attempts to manifest The Kingdon down here on this outlier planet in the solar system?

with permission, let's make this solar system an outlier in the existing milky way galaxy.

Of course it's relevant.
Is it moral to punish someone for an action when they did not know it was wrong?
Is it moral to punish someone for an act they did not committed, but committed by a distant ancestor?

As for use of documents such as our Constitution, of course it's relevant when demonstrating you perfectly moral God fails to meet even the most basic standards of what we consider moral.

And the same problem applies to those who attempt to substitute a supernatural god in place of your space aliens.

yes, there's realtime problems when at the base of the barrel, humans don't know from whence they came, where they are, nor where they are headed next.

but we know all of that. what we need now is a good story to help extricate ourselves from this mess?

Gus,

Part of the equation is a psychological trait know as "ability to accept ambiguity". For those of us high in this trait, "I don't know" is an acceptable answer. For those low in this trait, they can not handle an answer of "I don't know", so they substitute that with "god(s) did it".

So, Adam and Eve's kids marries kids from the separate creations of other space aliens we call gods, then the Christian space alien god ordered his followers to wipe out the families they married into from the other space alien gods? Is that your hypothesis?

What evidence for your space alien god hypothesis do you have that's better supported the the Theory of Evolution by Natural Selection?[/quote]

the problem as i see it, for us minority adventurers, as i perceive it, is that the alien hypotheses works well right up to the point that someone dares to ask: "well, where did the aliens come from?" that is, what was the process that allowed the aliens (extraterrestrials) to populate the earth?

at that point we're thrown into mental disarray. truely, where did they come from, and why did they choose to colonize earth?

but, assuming they did all of that and for good reason, then my storyline helps explain why the hebrews under direction of the mighty YHWH were such natural borne killers in the attempts to manifest The Kingdon down here on this outlier planet in the solar system? [/quote]

And the same problem applies to those who attempt to substitute a supernatural god in place of your space aliens. [/quote]

yes, there's realtime problems when at the base of the barrel, humans don't know from whence they came, where they are, nor where they are headed next.

but we know all of that. what we need now is a good story to help extricate ourselves from this mess?
[/quote]


Gus,

Part of the equation is a psychological trait know as "ability to accept ambiguity". For those of us high in this trait, "I don't know" is an acceptable answer. For those low in this trait, they can not handle an answer of "I don't know", so they substitute that with "god(s) did it". [/quote]

oh, i agree on at least a partial point of your comment. people want to know. what they don't know can be attributed to god's will. the early scribes called anyone doing something powerfully majical on the earth as god. why wouldn't they? they were stone age, pretty much. desert herders who cooled under the shade oak trees where the sheep & goats watered, and were grazing fresh grass. we have to give them credit. they were asking questions, wondering, speculating, sharing information and opinions.

while in the rational world, and discussing the metaphysical is not exactly an easy task?

i mean, they had to eat, find food & water for their flocks, kill off wolven, etc.

care for everyone, including the sick & injured, the old, the babies. beget babies for the future.

it wasn't an easy life? not very noble, or romantic either one? the human future depended upon their decisions & related outcomes?

if we humans can't explain something with the available information at our fingertips, let's leave it up to "god?" i mean why not?

Gus, what reason do we have to believe "god(s)" is the right answer? And does substituting a wrong answer stop at least some people from looking for the correct one?

oh geez. we find ourselves engaged in argumentation of the metaphysical, the divine, the mystical, the majical. please pick one or more?

we don't really know who/how we were put here, by whom, nor why. a perfect god would be perfect. why even need us?

i figure some god/alien/dna expert designed us, and set us loose down here on the earth. and left to survive.

where did the designer come from? well, that's a step backward in time toward the beginning.

maybe god enjoys riding on top of the clouds, pissing down on the earth and observing?

most of what the public schools taught us might be wrong, same with the church?

i fall back upon the writings of the ex-catholic priest Dr. Mathew Fox.

but, what could he have possibly known that none of us do?

Buddhism is more philosophy than religion and contains much to recommend it. My philosophy goes thusly:

The Universe contains three entities... me, you, and God, however we each conceive that God.

If I relate myself to God correctly, which is to say honestly, then I am in perfect relationship to you insofar as I can control it. If you have a correct relationship with God,then we have no cause for strife between us.

That’s all there is to it.

Jesus, the Christ, has revealed Himself to me. That’s the beginning, and the end, of “ Christianity” for me.

Whatever “ works “ for me in this life is most likely my best shot in the afterlife........ assuming there is one.

The Bible also doesn't mention how old Cain was when he slew Abel. It doesn't mention a of of things. And being a complete history or a complete explanation of all the details was never the point. But go ahead and build your box.

Like I said, Cain was the 1st one mentioned but that doesn't mean he was born first. We have no idea how long they were in the garden or if they had children before the fall. There's no mention of time at all. After he murdered Abel, Cain was afraid of those other people out there. If he and Able were the 1st, who would those other people have been?
These are things that we aren't told. You're trying to inject info that simply isn't there.

Thanks. There are more too. Where, for example, did all the extra water come from? Enough to cover the world including the mountains. And where did it go to afterwards?

And this water, was it fresh or salty?

And how did water-living plants and animals survive, given that many are very sensitive to changes in salinity, temperature and light levels? How did the marine food web survive, when sudden change of depth and salinity and turbidity would have wiped out the seagrasses, algae and other life forms down at the bottom?

How do you account for coral reefs, some many thousands of years old, which can only survive across quite a narrow set of criteria, specifically including depth, clarity and temperature?

And the olive leaf the bird brought back. How could that have been found? Olive trees submerged for a year won't survive - even growing them in poorly-drained soil will soon kill them.

What would you feed your obligate carnivore animals on for a year on the Ark?

There must have been a lot of stuff happening from Genesis 1 thru 4. I know many religious books talk a lot about this period, especially the Hebrew texts which make the claim that God created the Heaven and Earth and Lucifer and is band polluted it until it was dark and total chaos. God then recreated a second time with the Fallen Ones doing it again until only Noah and his family were left perfect in their generation. He then attempted to wipe out the Luciferian race of half human, half Angel again. Some made it through again. Lots of history on it if one cares to dig.
Since Cain is not in Adams lineage, something must have happened between Eve and the Serpent. Hhmmmmmm . Adam race begins with Seth after Abel was killed.

AS, whatever are you talking about? Of course A and E when told not to eat of the forbidden fruit had full knowledge (perhaps much fuller than we can realize) of a moral choice and thus were fully responsible.

Are you next referring to what we inherit as our fallen nature’s from A and E? Yes, personal total depravity. We are sinful beings too due to the Fall and are not innocent nor unjustly charged.

First I don't accept any of your assertions that someone who didn't have knowledge of good and evil is fully morally formed. In our society Eve would have gone to Juvy, and had her record expunged at age 21.

Also by extension to your logic, if you break the law the state is justified in executing your kids?

And there's also the problem of no credible evidence Eden was real, or the Universe is only 6k years old.

Noah himself had all the shipwright knowhow?..how do you draw such conclusion?

If So, God would not have to provide the plans, Just tell Noah what he needs to transport
and Noah would be able to work the size and shape out himself.

God gave Noah the task/project of constructing an Ark, but he may have hired people with the required
skills to complete the task...ie; Noah being overseer or project leader.

With Solomon building the temple, at least we are told he drafted forced labor out of all Israel.
and also used resident aliens in Israel which were listed on the census done by his father David.



Rock Chuck said God steered the Ark because it didn't have a rudder,
I gather God could also use his powers to steady a box hull ark in rough waters.

either way wild guesses and assumptions don't confirm anything about details that don't appear in scripture.

Mess?...what mess?...Hinduism considers it all an illusion (Maya) as does Buddhism.

Nothing more than a dreamy temporary thought bubble of God , that can make a dream seem
so very real (to humans) but isn't.

If your own dreams can seem so vividly real at times, imagine what a supreme being(ultimate Brahman)
can dream up!..
dream characters called humans even having dreams of their own...hows that for ya...



Urth could be an inter-galactic penal colony....or inter-galactic quarantine station
its not like we can escape or really go anywhere is it?
felons can like to stay in prison cause it can be easier than the outside world,[ or in our case universe].
or urth could be some nerd aliens 'ant farm'

Being of the Baptist persuasion myself, I can fully agree with Antelope Sniper’s post without risk to my immortal soul.

IF there be a hell, I earned a front row seat by my own endeavors with no assist needed from Adam.

I’m most grateful that the Universe operates by perfect justice being tempered by perfect mercy.

For all I KNOW, that mercy may even be granted to those who don’t ask for it.

Since God's Word is quite clear about sin passing to all we can know there were no children born before they sinned. All "those other people out there" were their brothers, sisters, nieces, and nephews. The Bible is quite clear about Adam and Eve being the parents of all people. If Adam and Eve had a baby their fist year, how were they when their first kid turned 100? How many kids could a near perfect breeding couple produce during that time. How old were the kids when they started marrying and having their own kids? With even rough arithmetic one can discover by the end of the first century there could have been quite a population.

The water was already here. The earth is sort of a closed system. Where did the water go? If the land is smoothed out the water would be about two miles deep all over the world. A better question is, where did all the dry land come from?

Ninety percent of fossils are marine fossils. We have no idea what the pre-flood ocean was; whether salty or totally fresh. The world has places like Bonneville Salt Flats where the salt is hundreds if not thousands of feet deep. These places are call juvenile salt flows, or something like that. Even if the original ocean was fresh it would have become salty during the Flood when the bosoms of the deep opened up. Water, lava, salt and no telling what all else came forward.

The other questions you are considering are not accepting the idea we have no idea about plants and animals 4,500 years ago. Lots of scientific information has be overturned in the last half century.

The Bible tells us everything alive was vegetarian prior to the Flood. After it Noah was told, "Everything alive is for food." Obviously lots of things changed at that time.

Certainly. But since we know that God makes all things work together for our good, to those who love Him and who are called for His Purpose, it's certainly not a stretch at all to understand that He took care of all things that needed taken care of. Also, certainly not a stretch for the One who spoke all things into existence.

Yes, that is certainly true and could be summed up in one word, logic. But also in truth, that verse is taken out of context and doesn't apply here. But, it is a great section in Romans letting us know that we were saved before the foundation of the Earth. So there is not a church on the Earth that can give me anything I don't all ready have. I know I am Spirit and that my Spirit is above the Angels in the ladder of hierarchy, so therefore, I am a Son of God.

Now back to the program. Is there not a logical explanation for this Flood business, or do we explain it away through emotion. The Hopi's like to talk about it and they sure seem more reasonable in their explanation than most churches do. And as Antelope Sniper posted, the Sumerians were the first ones on the planet to write about it.

I'm a Christian trained in science and I realize, fully, that the hydrological cycle as we know it exists does not support the idea that a flood could have covered the entire land mass of the planet. There is simply not enough physical water on the planet to do it, and the amount required is far beyond anything that could be jettisoned through natural means.

So either ...
1) There was a miracle by God to accomplish the flood. (I fully accept miracles. For example, I don't doubt for a second that Christ was raised from the dead).
2) The Noah story is allegorical.

I'm okay with either explanation. I don't know, and I honestly don't understand the Noah account. I can live with this small uncertainty.

The bottom line is that there is such an enormous amount of solid rational evidence that I don't doubt for a minute in the existence of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob and that he is who he says He is. I literally have no doubts about His existence and that the world is raging a battle of spiritual turmoil for the hearts and souls of men.

Sorry AS, but God isn’t relying on any of us and our opinions nor our heavenly justice system.

One of the few cogent posts here. I believe the flood was a real event as as the Hebrew narrative of Genesis is of the historical genre and for just one other reason, Noah and other OT saints were mentioned in the NT as actual real persons.

The flood I believe was a completely supernatural event changing the environment completely from pre-diluvian times (for example, with an ensuing ice age), perhaps radiation decay rates also (which would play havoc with our radiometric dating methods of today) as well as allowing increased atmospheric radiation and certainly causing extreme climate change (perhaps Al Gore meant from then?). Undoubtedly, there were many other changes also.

And yes, I’d like to reiterate your statement that “there is such an enormous amount of solid rational evidence” for what we are discussing.

good points. it seems like you kinda allude to human consciousness. perhaps it's the last frontier? one could argue that outer space is the final frontier. but, someone in another 200 years might come along and conclude that outer space is a just a part of our condition that involves human consciousness.

the holographic universe as some might call it, as an analogy, maybe.

the buddhists do have some insights..to the point there might be a fusion of buddhism & christianity a little further down the road.

we've already got attempted fusions of christianity & islam being proffered. no tellin' what the internet will finally bring us.

It seems you didn't learn about the part if the land was smoothed out the water would be about two miles deep. I heard it in two different lectures by Ph.D scientists. Both started as evolutionists and were converted to creation by their scientific observations. The first one was a Ph.D in hydraulics and water sedimentation. While studying in the Grand Canyon he discovered the layers had to be laid down in one continuous flood. The other was a chemist. He discovered it based on the time it takes for coal and oil to form. He said, "If it does not form quickly, it doesn't form at all." He decided a world wide flood could cause the conditions necessary to produce both. In a question and answer session he said a better question would be, "Where did all the land come from?"

wildly speculative, but might have to do with the fact that water is less dense than the average earth fill?

even more speculative, is that the earth may be more dense than it use to be? that is, the water floats on top of the earth's landbase, and fills in the "low" spots. the high spots of land include mountains, piedmont, etc.

it is all very interesting, for certain. a lot of folks have wondered why didn't the water soak or percolate into the earth, and become super-heated.

Yes Gus...humans are in an 'asleep' sickly state full of illusion.

and its said the task of metaphysician Christ is to destroy illusion.

Christ was not a metaphysician.

He *said to them, "But who do you say that I am?" Simon Peter answered, "You are the Christ, the Son of the living God." And Jesus said to him, "Blessed are you, Simon Barjona, because flesh and blood did not reveal this to you, but My Father who is in heaven.
(Mat 16:15-17)

Creationists have claimed there is geological fossil evidence of widespread rapid burial underwater.
and rely on such as evidence for a global flood.

Yet examples of such fossils show evidence of carnivory....

Compsognathus - found with a lizard in its belly
T. rex coprolite (fossil dung) found with a high proportion (30–50%) of bone fragments.

That depends on which christian you talk to....some say he was Physician of the Body and Metaphysician of the Soul.
scripture shows him ministering and administering toward both body and soul.

He also describes himself as a physician for the sick.

i really like pondering on the mystical aspects of Jesus's life. probably as a minority viewpoint, i like to place emphasis on his teachings. but, we can emphasize any aspect that we wish, i suppose.

he healed the sick, the lame, the blind. maybe brought some back from the dead. yes, i'd say he was a metaphysician for sure, not to discount his other aspects.

That only addresses a couple of issues, and even then doesn't really answer. Taking it from the top, if the earth was completely "smoothed out" and all sources of water (including that currently trapped in rocks, as ice, and as water vapour) was available to cover it, the depth would be about 2700 m - rather less than 2 miles. That would be nowhere near covering Ararat (nearly 4000 m), let alone covering all the high mountains under the heavens ...to a depth of more than 15 cubits (Genesis 7:19-20), And of course the earth is not smoothed, nor was it smoothed during the Great Flood - the references to mountains confirm that.

As for whether the original ocean was salty or fresh, the thing is that there are forms of marine life that can only live in the one, or the other due (among other things) to the problem of osmoregulation. If all life was created in the first six days, these differences would have had to exist pre-Flood. If the sea was fresh water, those life forms adapted for life in the salt would not survive. Conversely those adapted for freshwater streams would not survive in the salt. There are comparatively few which can go from one to the other. If the Flood then comes along, clearly you replace a situation where there are rivers and springs of fresh water and seas of salt with floodwater of intermediate salinity (and high turbidity too), in which many species just could not have survived. Your alternative scenario, that the seas were fresh and then became salty with the Great Flood is equally problematic, because such a situation would kill all those life forms not adapted to that huge change in osmotic pressure.

There also those species which are littoral, depending on tides to wash in and then expose them over the course of each day, they all die too under 15 cubits of water over the highest mountain.

The salt at Bonneville Salt Flats is not "hundreds if not thousands of feet deep". It is up to 5 feet deep, in the deepest part, and tapers away to about an inch deep around the edges.

You say "we have no idea about plants and animals 4500 years ago". But in fact we do, both if you accept current science and if you insist on the literal truth of Genesis. Science tells us about plants and animals which existed 4500 years ago in a number of ways, including the fact that there are samples of them which have been found, including plant material, bones etc., there is DNA, there's cave art and even the fact that there are some living life forms which are actually more than 4500 years old. If instead we accept the literal truth of Genesis, all plants and animals alive now were made by the Creator in the first six days. They weren't replaced with different ones post-Flood, and so the olive tree of Genesis is the same olive tree now.

"The Bible tells us everything alive was vegetarian prior to the Flood." Well, it actually tells us that Abel kept flocks, and brought fat portions to offer the Lord. Jabal and his descendants also kept flocks. Putting that to one side, there are animals which in fact cannot survive on a vegetarian diet. They are obligate carnivores - cannot survive without meat. They don't have the specialised adaptations required for a vegetarian diet. As well as teeth adapted only for gripping and tearing meat, or crushing bones, or venom, or muscles to constrict prey, their digestive system simply cannot process vegetable matter. The changes necessary for them to go from a vegetarian diet to a meat diet would be quite major changes to their body.

But yet there are deposits at various stages in the process from plant matter to peat to lignite to anthracite, indicating deposition at widely divergent dates, and we have good evidence for the mechanisms leading from one to another, including time, heat and pressure, and the long period over which these take place..

Treating Christ as a meataphysician is a typical path to mysticism. Who and what Christ was is simple. He was the Messiah prophecied of in the Old testament. He had many names but never metapyhsician.

Jesus *said to him, "I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father but through Me.
(Joh 14:6)

Even you know there are marine fossil in the Ararat mountains. The problem you have is you think the earth then was the same as now. It wasn't.


Apparently you have not read enough about adaptation.



Apparently you have not read enough about adaptation.



You are looking at the tide flats as they are today. You have no good idea what was happening 4,500 years ago.



Looks like I made a mistake. I will do some checking.



You are assuming dating systems are accurate. Having talked with a couple geologists I have grave reservation about dating things. If you are referring to bristlecone pines, which is the oldest plant I have heard of, are about 4,500 years old. I am a little flexible when it comes to ages. Not very flexible, but some. As far as life forms....all life forms are older than 4,500 years old. They are approximately 6,000 years old.



Again you are looking at things the way they are now. I wouldn't be surprised if there are shepherds alive today who are vegetarians. Flocks produce fiber, leather, and no telling what all internal organs may have been used for. For sure some animals were used for sacrifice. Remember the first killer was God. He killed at least one animal and maybe two to make coverings for Adam and Eve.

I believe you believe what you posted. But I will the word of creationist Ph.D scientists over an internet poster every time. I made a discovery a long time ago. Even before I became a creationist. I discovered if you read enough evolutionists you will discover they all think those who don't agree with them are discredited. Of course I didn't even know there were people who were creation scientists at the time. In fact I discovered scientific creationism years later.

Aguing with ringman about the creation:

I have read quite a lot about it. What adaptation would be required for an animal adapted exclusively to living in salt water to move to fresh, or vice versa? Consider in your answer the structural differences between salt-adapted vs fresh-adapted creatures. How would that be achieved , in the timescale of the Great Flood? If the animals have existed unchanged since Creation, how is this adaptation achieved? And if they are changed since Creation, isn't that evolution?



As above




But as you say, there are fossils. We actually have fossilised littoral zones and fossilised denizens of those littoral zones. If we accept that all of these are artifacts of the Great Flood, then we do have clear evidence of the existence of animals adapted to this habitat, as at the time posited for this Great Flood, some of which continue to exist today. Creatures which could not have survived the Great Flood as described in Genesis.



There's a good idea.



There are Bristlecone Pines well over 5000 years old. But there are also clonal colonies of plants tens of thousands of years old, in various locations around the planet.



Again you have dodged the problem of animals which simply cannot survive without meat. Shepherds can, but snakes and cats and various other species cannot. And they cannot "adapt" to a vegetarian diet either, nor could they have adapted from it, without major structural changes of the sort which would make them completely different animals.

Creationist scientist are not scientist.

Lock T-Rex and his wife in an ark for 12 months and only give them vegan...
it wouldn't be long before they busted down their stalls and went rampaging through the ark
eating anything and everything they liked...

before ya know it Noah would have a carnivore mutiny on his hands...

together with 3500 lb cave bears, 1100 lb lions and 1100 lb tigers, make for interesting hunger games.

then thrown in other things like ... 'Purussaurus brasilensis' ancient croc around 40ft long and 8 tons...
or even...

'Jaekelopterus rhenaniae', .. 8 foot giant scorpions.

All we know is that God gave Noah size specifications and some other requirements. Whether he drew up a blueprint to follow, is speculation. It's a long trek from having basic knowledge of how a boat should be built and what shape it should take.....to being a naval architect. I made no such claim. I think it's reasonable to admit that people of the time who lived near water at some point in their life may have seen or used at least canoes. I also think it's reasonable to expect that they could know a rounded and faired hull wouldn't get slapped around like a flat bottom and flat side, and would be stronger as well. It ain't rocket science - for anyone who's been around various boats.



Absolutely agreed. Again, we can't know, but it makes sense.



No way am I buying the long box Ark idea. Rudder or no, that thing is going to be torture, unless the water remains flat and calm. A cataclysmic flood lasting for months and changing the earth's climate and structure doesn't sound conducive to those conditions. Sure, God can do anything he desires, but we can get into a lot of pointless discussion about why he would need to have a boat at all if the boat has to be continuously steadied by his hand.



True. But if without evidence of otherwise, I'm going to assume that people of Noah's time weren't as ignorant as most people think. And I'm going to assume that God allows some logic to be applied.

So also safe to assume Adam & Eve had a canoe?..since Genesis mentions 4 rivers associated with the garden of Eden.
Genesis 2:10
" And a river went out of Eden to water the garden; and from thence it was parted, and became into four heads."

if boating wasn't part of their lifestyle, id say they were not making the most of things...



Seems God doesn't trust Noah to have the fundamental sound knowledge of boat building...for he had to
specifically tell him the type of timber and about requirement to tar the structure:

Genesis 6:14
"Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch".




Anyone who's 'been around various boats' in Noahs time likely wouldn't need be told what specific timbers or about taring the inside/out
of the hull...If Noah don't already know that, then it don't seem wise to safely assume he knew of the best basic hull shape for the task.

if ya think all the birds, animals, and reptilians on the ark might have made an organic mess, just consider 7.2 billion humans and everyone of them crapping in their easter basket. the microbes are extra busy converting things from one organic form to another.

it's getting to the point that one can't swim in the waterways around here after a big rain.

(i realize easter is a pretty mystical term at it's root, but i thought i'd throw it in for good measure. the kitchen sink comes later).

Starman - this branch of the discussion is a fun exercise. Thanks for playing along...



I have to believe that anyone who's lived hundreds of years and has access to bodies of water would not have passed up the opportunity to do some boating. The thought of doing otherwise, to me, is sacrilegious.



My specific contention is regarding the shape of the boat and strength of joinery. No doubt, Noah or anybody would have needed instruction on materials and other things for something that size. But hull shape and how it behaves are pretty basic things that apply to all sizes.



Size matters. Look at today's modern canoes vs a WW2 battleship. I'm no naval architect, but I can build a canoe out of materials I am familiar with. That's no big thing. We know some pretty primitive people have managed it quite well. Having no need for my own battleship, and having never seen one, I could go a few hundred years without ever figuring that out. To build or design one, I would need a lot of help - beginning with some schooling in the properties of steel.

Again, it's the shape of the hull I am focusing on. That box idea might make sense to a bean counter, but it makes no sense to a person who spends a lot of time in boats - even boats with no rudder.

Will somebody holler at me when the ark questions are answered?

I’m anxious to get started on Jonah and the whale.

Best just get on with it, this thing isn't going to be resolved in lifetime. So, 3 days in the belly of a large fish, you say...

The story of Jonah and the story of Noah are very different. The story of Jonah can be explained simply as a miracle. No natural explanation required.

"To build or design one, I would need a lot of help - beginning with some schooling in the properties of steel.

"Again, it's the shape of the hull I am focusing on. That box idea might make sense to a bean counter, but it makes no sense to a person who spends a lot of time in boats - even boats with no rudder.
-------------------------------------
It was a miracle!!! God even gave Noah the detailed plans for the 16,000 horsepower diesel engine he used to propel the ark and keep it pointed into the wind and waves. IIRC, the plans also included details for the twin props.

I know this is true because the Reverend Billy Bob told me so (he of the Righteous, Holiness, Divine, Eternal, Almighty Church of God and other Creatures).

The animals alive at the time of the Flood were only about 1,700 years away from near perfection. They had a tenth of the mutations animals have now. The animals alive today are about 4,500 years since the Flood. Much of their adaptability has been lost.

Since you are locked into the present you don't seem to be able to conceive things have not always been the way they are now. Therefore I will not respond further.

It appears you and I might agree on their intelligence. But maybe not. I am convinced the smartest of us today, if somehow time traveled to anti-diluvium time, would be put in a mental institution for the mentally impaired. The folks alive would feel sorry for the poor soul.

This is why I don't get sucked into a debate over all the details of Old Testament doctrine. Arguments you can't win, either way. The question of what the Ark may have looked like is more of an academic exercise, without so much drama.

Going back the photo in the OP, I think those folks in Kentucky may be on to something with that design. In wind and waves, you wouldn't want something that would be blown sideways and fall off the peaks sideways. If you've spent much time in canoes, you know what I mean. That design looks to be self- aligning in wind and waves (to some degree). The near end would not be the "bow".

I certainly wouldn't argue against that.

[quote=OldHat][quote=curdog4570]Will somebody holler at me when the ark questions are answered?

If Im gonna believe ol Jonah’s story explaining where he was in the missing three days, how can I call bullschidt on the Az guy who was captured by Alien Beings and was missing for a couple days?

Oh I see. What you are saying is that species today are different from those in existence at the time of the Creation. They have adapted, as you say. You say that this has occurred by way of mutations, changing them over time over time, from what they originally were to what they are now.

In other words, what you are saying is that they've evolved.

Thanks for playing!

Because both claims and not viewed in isolation. I don't decide to believe in Jonah's story as an isolated story. I believe in the Bible because of a very large collection of evidence for the existence of God I'm sifted through during my entire life.

You are trying to conflate mice to men evolution with adaptation. I'm not buying it. Adaptation was written about by Blyth a decade prior to Darwin changing it to "survival of the fittest" in his book. He didn't tell us from where the fittest came. Blyth did. Mutations take things in the wrong direction for mice to men evolution.

Everything alive at creation was vegetarian. You seem to miss the idea of the Creator making everything vegetarian and then changing some animals to carnivores later; including men.

anybody?...you mean everyone was ignorant regarding building ships in those times?

Do Arks require different timber to other various size ranging vessels that you say Noah would have already known about?
( check: you were referring to Noah when you said it aint rocket science for....'Anyone who's 'been around various boats'.....??)

Was pitching-taring hulls exclusive to Arks....??.... Noah over centuries [of being around boats]
would have seen numbers of various size vessels that had been tared...?



but not 'materials and other things' required for proper boat construction?
that sounds illogical.




I am using LOGIC [which you made a point of] when I said; If Noah doesn't even know to tar a hull how would he
then know which geometry of hull to use?

If he's was suppopsedly around various type vessels for centuries how can he know one, but not the other?
after all, none of that ranks as rocket science as you say.




The fact God didnt tell him which hull design to use, does not logically mean Noah already knew.
It could just mean God knew that Noah of his own accord, would have the intelligence to seek out
those experienced shipwrights that did.

God knew precisely what he knew and didn't know before issuing the task.




Again you expect Noah to already know about the correct hull design , but not something as basic as taring.
that seems rather illogical.

With todays evangelists ordering new executive jets, Id have thought God would at least have come up
with a silent propulsion stealth drive for the Ark together with gyro-stabilsation for the hull..
Of course God could have just caused it to rain and killed the winds which were rocking the ark around..
***

ITs probably a good thing our technology was not around in Adam & Eves day...

Imagine God giving Adam a badass big horsepower bass boat with all the waterways to himself....but
telling him its only catch and release....cause you are not allowed to eat animal protein...

Actually. I recall a documentary quite a few years ago, where they built a model to the scale specs of the Ark, and subjected it to simulated 60foot waves. It was the most stable design they tested.

Ack. Now you're just being argumentative. Makes no difference to me whether Noah had the knowledge, was given the kknowledge, hired the knowledge or figured it out on his own. I'm just speculating on the possibilities. My point is simply that the box-boat doesn't make biblical, historical, or logical sense; and the shape of the replica in Kentucky does, That's all.

So, what designs did they test? My experience tells me to bet it looked something like an old school whitewater tripping canoe.

No, I am just pointing out how you contradict yourself.

people who contradict themselves are actually arguing with themselves.




saying that its 'safe to assume' things doesn't equate to just speculation.

speculation is just conjecture.
safe to assume means a person is confident in their theory.

Is there something wrong with believing in God?

I believe in God. I also believe in evolution. I don’t think it’s mutually exclusive.

Critters change over time. I believe that God created that structure and gave Life the ability to transform.

Be fruitful, multiply, and change.

Simple.






P

Microbres/bacteria how vital-important they are in function of organisms and the life cycles on urth ...things that you and I would avoid
are relished by nature.
and things that God thinks only deserve death/wrath and destruction are actually found a use for by Jesus, like a dung beetle makes
use of waste.

Today's evangelists aren't buying executive jets. A few dudes on TV are buying executive jets.

10s of thousands of evangelists are flying coach.

Not only is there nothing wrong with believing in God, it is rational and wise to believe in Him.

Your understanding of Christianity seems wrong. You seem to think Jesus and God are unrelated. They are not.

1) Jesus is God
2) The wrath of God is reserved for those who reject Him.

"God gave Noah the dimensions for the Ark in cubits. “And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits.” (Genesis 6:15)" (
300 cubits in length, 50 cubits in width and 30 cubits in height (450 × 75 × 45 ft or 137 × 22.9 × 13.7 m).)
It would need to be a closed structure against wave and weather. The model looked somewhat like a coffin, and rode the turmoil like a wood chip, but never flipped, or sank. (Iirc) they tested it against all other designs known to that region and age.

From what I read about cubits they were anywhere from 17 1/2" -22" long. I bet ol' Ken used 22" for his cubits. I don't want to be a trouble maker, but I want to know what area and design? God's Word tells us, "the world that then was was destroyed." Therefore we have no idea where the ark came from or designs known prior to the Flood. I remember reading an article, containing pictures, about ancient wooden ships that were made AFTER the Flood. Some were up to 200 feet long and looked like the ark in Kentucky.

I don't doubt that.

I suggest you do a search for the term "sea kindly". Not flipping or sinking is a good start - and that's not hard to accomplish with other shapes - but it's not everything.

I don't believe God meant to torture the passengers for months.

Where can I see the report of this test? I'd love to see all the details.

some serious minded folks have actually shared that they believed the microbes which definitely cover the earth are far more close to god than we humans are.

but our ego's simply refuse to accept such a possibility. we all know humans are the apex predator on this earth.

Not contradicting myself at all. The contradiction is in your mind. I blew off your comment about tar because it's obvious that you're trying to direct the discussion away from the point now. Since you seem to be hung up on that, I'll comment. Tar is not necessary in all boat construction - even for "primitives". Your assumption that one without the knowledge of the use of tar could not be familiar with small boat design is in error.

As for your "speculation" charge....you are deliberately attaching that to the wrong issue. I reiterate...



Those two sentences are together for a reason. The one is referring to the other. I can only speculate where some of the knowledge (best shape for a boat) might have come from - because there are multiple possibilities. The assumption that you seem to be defending here is one of God necessarily being the source of every detail. That is simply not supported by the information available.




Whatever....your post was split so much, I chose not to address ever separate question.Now I will, since I have more time. But you'll have to bare with me because I ain't gonna do the fine editing. My answers in color....








Regardless of all that.....if God did, in fact, give Noah et al a "blueprint", you still have a long way to go to convince me that He would have Noah build a torture box just to be size-efficient. Boats are designed with logic, which is often revealed by experience. I would advise for you the same search I mentioned to another poster - "sea kindly". It is a thing.

Edit:...and I would further suggest that God would fully understand the physics of moving water and interaction with surfaces and angles, as well as requirements for structural integrity, and he would take that into account when deciding what Noah needed to know or who he needed to hire.

As I mentioned in my first post, it was quite a while ago. And while I remember watching the program, I do not recall who did it. Or for what network. It was a straight forward science type program.
As for sea friendly, I doubt he gave a damn about comfort. Survival was the design parameters.

nowhere did I say they were not related...many of my past CF posts relate the Father to the Son.




Gods wrath is what God considers every sinner rightfully deserves.. whether they accept Christ or not,
for God gave his Son as a sacrifice out of GRACE, not because sinners deserves such.

I haven't tried to convince you one way or the other on the hull design , but I have questioned how you think.. 'its safe fo assume'.. things,
when all you really have is conjecture.



everyone was likely ignorant on building large vessels..?

thats sounds like a highly speculative-conjecture based claim to me ...but you express it like its safe to assume such.

Gods details to Noah on the Ark are rather few, so would it be logical to think God knew some people already had the additional knowledge required for such task?



Where have I claimed God was, or had to be , the source of every detail...???

earlier I made this statement:
'The fact God didnt tell him which hull design to use, does not logically mean Noah already knew.
It could just mean God knew that Noah of his own accord, would have the intelligence to seek out
those experienced shipwrights that did. '

obviously from that I am clearly suggesting God didn't provide all or every detail...but you seem totally blind to it.

Nothing I can find in scriptures shows Noah personally had proper knowledge of boat construction. [regardless of shape, size or otherwise]
or to use your words.... That is simply not supported by the information available.

but if you have scriptural evidence to support what you call a safe assumption, you make like to present it to CF readers.
without reasonable evidence , it would just be mere conjecture on your part.



Can you clarify what you mean by 'different ' timber.?

and what relative size do you mean by a small vessel?





actually We do know from scripture that God had given Noah some very specific details for the Ark.

OALxWxH dimensions...rooms, ...a roof...where to position the window,...number of decks ..side door, .gopherwood, tar inside /out. etc

nothing in scripture says God gave him any other details on construction than the Book lists.
accordingly I am not inclined to create conjecture that we are missing out on details that God gave Noah on construction , but didnt give us.

the pecking order of APs has changed considerably over time and may do so again.

Spinosaurus was the biggest bad ass AP currently known to date that roamed both land and waterways
https://dinosours.files.wordpress.com/2014/09/img_2371.jpg

..ego driven humans now [temporarily?] have the nuclear advantage,
but microbes may win in the end...



..' blessed are the meek for they shall inherit the urth'.

****

Re: the bio waste generated by humans..

Water into wine, so maybe human waste into..?...Im sure Jesus could do it with the support of his Father.
with a Patent protected miracle process, It could prove far more lucrative than being a king,carpenter ,shepherd, judge and physician...

Jesus is God. You talk like He is not.

Thomas answered and said to Him, "My Lord and my God!"
(Joh 20:28)



Those who accept Christ as the Lord of their life escape His wrath.

"He who believes in the Son has eternal life; but he who does not obey the Son will not see life, but the wrath of God abides on him."
(Joh 3:36)

This fly's in the face of who God is and what the Gospel tells us. Anyone who would think so, does not know the Gospel or God.

yes, i can see that. in today's postmodern culture, it's easy to imagine god and/or his son working through big pharma to download a miracle cure solution to the bio-geneticists who are striving to find cures for the many diseases & afflictions affecting the apex predator. big pharma for the good of all will quickly patent the solution through the us patent office so it won't get stolen away by the heathen on the urth.

with the right miracle drug on the market and advertised righteously, the coffers of the churches might literally explode!

"Comfort" implies luxury. That's not at all what I'm talking about. I'm talking about the difference between getting knocked off your feet, slammed against walls, and puking continuously. Kind of hard to eat under those conditions. Makes survival kind of questionable. Need more room because the boat doesn't have square corners? Make a bigger boat.

Appears you and the people behind that program spent little time in boats.


But then...maybe the waters were dead calm the whole time (miracle). But that brings up the question, why bother with a boat instead of miraculously saving them on a miraculous mountain top? Or why have a flood at all? Why not just miraculously snap fingers and proclaim all the evil people dead?

Break it down...

1) I admit to some conjecture, but my assumptions are based on belief that God uses logic, and God doesn't deliberately torture his creation and chosen ones for no good reason.

2) I invite again you to offer an explanation of what would be the purpose of large vessels prior to the flood - based on scripture, since that is what you are limiting me to.

3) In retrospect, you are right. I don't know what you are assuming. Wasn't it you who claimed that God had to tell Noah how to build the Ark - as evidenced by the instruction for gopher wood and tar? I'm losing track in this thread, clearly - but I'm not going to read it again.

There you go making assumptions without any facts to back them up. I happen to like boats. I rebuilt a sailboat and taught my son to sail, and even taught him how to right a sailboat in deep water. I helped in the reconstruction of a steel hull 30' cabin cruiser as well. You have no basis for your assumption.

More...

1) Scripture says nothing explanatory about the dynamics of moving water against displacement vessels. It says nothing about superior strength of curved surfaces vs box corners. It says nothing about the physical dangers (injury, starvation, etc) of spending months trapped inside a carnival ride. Yet....they exist. Limiting the discussion to what is in scripture is an attempt to control the discussion and shape it's outcome. Nice try.

2) Small vessel = personal or family-sized watercraft, such as what might be used to travel small bodies of water. There is no mention of commercial navigation prior to the flood - so, by your standard, it must not have happened. Now, why would they have anything larger?

As for the timber.....surely, you jest. Different = larger, stronger, taller (longer), denser...and/or other. I can build a usable boat with no other wood but pine saplings. It ain't going to be very big though, and it ain't going to haul much of a load.

3)Why you would think that God has told us everything that he told Noah is a mystery to me. He has told us what we need to know, at least, but clearly has not told us everything. And BTW - there you go again....

Not an assumption. I expected that you might correct that observation. The "appearance" was there, base on your apparent lack of understanding how the issue goes beyond "comfort".

So - how much time have you spent on a boat in rough water? In different hull shapes (round vs flat)? Personally - I've been all over the map with that.

Not much on rough seas, had enough sense not to. Been out in the Gulf a couple times, but mostly lakes, and rivers. Not that it matters much. With a means of propulsion, many things can serve as a boat. But I find no sails, oars, or outboard motors in the directions given to Noah. Gopher wood or cypress, 3 decks, rooms, a window. And a door for loading, and dimensions. Nothing about going anywhere, just riding out the flood waters.in essence a life boat. He was no sailor, and could not have made use of a "better" hull design, even if he knew how to build it.


https://goo.gl/images/xBk3Yo

Everyone is a sailor when the wind comes up. Some good, some bad. Lack of a sail doesn't stop the wind from moving your boat. Get out in a canoe on a windy day and check it out. If your canoe is symmetrical and trimmed evenly, you'll be blown sideways across the waves. Give it a rudder or skeg (mounted or in hand), and you'll be blown mostly downwind with the waves. With a good amount of rocker or dead-rise to the stems, it will be less likely to dig in and broach. These things make for a more survivable ride, even - or especially - without propulsion.

It's basic stuff.

So does a basic sea anchor. But that is pretty much the point. He was at the mercy of wind and wave, and not a lot he could do about it, other than just ride it out, with only the most basic steerage.

Gonna have to run that by Starman. I don't recall any mention of sea anchor in Genesis.

Nope, and no mention of how to stow it all away for best ballest either. "Just get it done, and you'll be hearing from me."
My minister told me "God never gives you more than you can handle, but he does test your limits, to expose your metal".