Origins TheologyForum for the discussion of Creation Science (Young/Old) vs Theistic Evolution. Discussion of Atheistic Evolution should be taken to the Discussion and Debate forums.
Even I understand the Noah's Flood literally, I have hard time to see how could Noah save the fishes (even with the help of angels). It is more likely that fishes were preserved in pockets of clean water in the ocean.
This leads to a problem that how literal could it be in the understanding of the global flood. Question in the OP is, in fact, an example of this problem. The Scripture does not record every details and It should not do so. So, while I literally believe the event, I would also say that the description skipped a lot of details. For example, fishes were not brought into the ark, does not mean the Scripture makes a wrong description.
That would have been hard. Just finding a blade small enough to do the job would be difficult, let alone pinning down insects without killing them, or the kind of precision needed to ...
... hmm, save you say, not shave?
__________________
And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? - Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]
Even I understand the Noah's Flood literally, I have hard time to see how could Noah save the fishes (even with the help of angels). It is more likely that fishes were preserved in pockets of clean water in the ocean.
Lets see, you flood the earth with torrents that grind the surface of the earth into sediment kilometres thick, swirl the world ocean around with hurricanes, flood surges, fountains of the deep, and giant tides unhindered by land for about a year, and after all that there are still pockets of clean water?
This leads to a problem that how literal could it be in the understanding of the global flood. Question in the OP is, in fact, an example of this problem. The Scripture does not record every details and It should not do so. So, while I literally believe the event, I would also say that the description skipped a lot of details. For example, fishes were not brought into the ark, does not mean the Scripture makes a wrong description.
Or biblical account simply isn't describing a global flood.
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
That would have been hard. Just finding a blade small enough to do the job would be difficult, let alone pinning down insects without killing them, or the kind of precision needed to ...
... hmm, save you say, not shave?
And now we know how humans lost their hair... I can see the film adaptation Sean Connery as the silverback leading a flange of australopithicuseses in their first great prayer, "When will you shave the people..."
__________________
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
And now we know how humans lost their hair... I can see the film adaptation Sean Connery as the silverback leading a flange of australopithicuseses in their first great prayer, "When will you shave the people..."
"Behold, the Lamb who takes away the shins of the world!"
The possibilities are myriad.
__________________
And who that has understanding will suppose that the first, and second, and third day, and the evening and the morning, existed without a sun, and moon, and stars? - Origen, 215AD [De Principiis 4.1.16]
Gen 7:21 And all flesh died that moved on the earth, birds, livestock, beasts, all swarming creatures that swarm on the earth, and all mankind. 22 Everything on the dry land in whose nostrils was the breath of life died.
Insects, arthropods, and fish don't have nostrils. That is what many would say about the "which organisms died in the flood" question.
__________________ Proverbs 18:17 The first to present his case seems right, till another comes forward and questions him. To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.