Ark Building

[Floodnut]

Mmmm... I like salt.
TRUNCATED

Salt is good --Jesus (Mark 9:50).

 

[Floodnut]

What makes me curious is that if the hired help wasn't corrupt and wicked, and actually did help Noah fulfill God's wishes, why didn't any of them get at least an invite onto the ark itself?

Noah alone of his generation was righteous before God (Genesis 6:8,9). Wicked people will help build a church building, or print a Bible if there is money in it for them. The wealth of the sinner is laid up for the just. Often God causes the wicked to praise him, to serve him, to accomplish his purposes. There is not a single reason in my mind to preclude some of the worldlings being hired to help. Then too, there were those from the preceeding generations, who were godly, like Methuselah and Lamech, and perhaps brothers and uncles of Lamech. These may have helped also, as godly men, but again why should not the ungodly be used? WE are on the INTERNET right now you know, and it isn't exactly run by the Billy Graham Evangelistic Association, and we use money covered with Pagan symbols as part of a God-hating country. I drive on roads built by pagans, and I eat food raised by pagans, I eat in Chinese restaurants. The world lies in the power of the wicked one.
And then remember the temple of Solomon, which "Solomon built" was built with trees contributed by non-Israelites. God enabled all the craftsmen, but they were not necessarily believers.
Still we have seen that Noah and his sons could have accomplished the task on their own in about 65 years.
Noah was a preacher of righteousness, and calling men to repent, but no one did. The flood came and took them all away.

 

[MatthewDiscipleofGod]

What makes me curious is that if the hired help wasn't corrupt and wicked, and actually did help Noah fulfill God's wishes, why didn't any of them get at least an invite onto the ark itself?

All would have been welcomed on the Ark, to bad they were too busy with their sin instead. As for your question about why God would wipe out the symptom instead of the cause is a problem of not looking at the whole picture. God actually did in fact end up wiping out sin on the cross. Right after Adam and Eve sinned he said he would do this. People, just as in Noah's day, reject the saving grace of God and instead choose to feed their sin instead.

 

[FallingWaters]

This is aside from the topic at hand, but I am curious, and I have often pondered this myself: Why did Noah have NO CHILDREN until he was 500 years old? Not all people are called to be married, like Paul and a few of the other prophets of Scripture. And perhaps Noah felt that he was called to be on his own as a prophet because of the evil times. But then God told him that it was now time to take a wife, and he trusted God who brought the right woman to him.
Or had he been married all along, for hundreds of years, but God had just not allowed his wife to conceive until just 100 years before the Flood?
I choose not to read the apocryphal literature, neither the gnostic, nor the simple extra-biblical but not inspired writing of ancient times. So I don't know what they have to say about this issue, but I am thinking that their imaginations produced their own versions.

Does the Bible really say he didn't have any children until he was 500? I have forgotten where it explains all that. I remember having to do my own math because it's not spelled out.

 

[Floodnut]

All would have been welcomed on the Ark, to bad they were too busy with their sin instead. As for your question about why God would wipe out the symptom instead of the cause is a problem of not looking at the whole picture. God actually did in fact end up wiping out sin on the cross. Right after Adam and Eve sinned he said he would do this. People, just as in Noah's day, reject the saving grace of God and instead choose to feed their sin instead.

Originally Posted by The Lady Kate
What makes me curious is that if the hired help wasn't corrupt and wicked, and actually did help Noah fulfill God's wishes, why didn't any of them get at least an invite onto the ark itself?

I think Lady Kate was wondering why God would destroy the "genetic corruption," but still allow the practices which had caused it to continue. As I said earlier, I think He did not allow it to continue, but rather, according to II Peter, he put the offenders in RESTRAINTS to disallow their continuation of that particular deed.

 

[Floodnut]

Does the Bible really say he didn't have any children until he was 500? I have forgotten where it explains all that. I remember having to do my own math because it's not spelled out.

"And Noah was five hundred years old, and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japeth" (Genesis 5:32). "Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters were on the earth" (Genesis 7:6). "And Noah lived after the Flood three hundred and fifty years. So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died" (Genesis 9:28,29).

500+100+350 = 950
Specifically it may be ascertained from other texts that Japeth was the firstborn, then Shem was born two years later (cf. Genesis 11:10), and then Ham was the youngest of the three (Genesis 9:24). The whole world was populated from these three, and no others (Genesis 9:19).

 

[LoG]

Ah, thank you. I briefly read some of chapter 1 and chapter 5. I feel more comfortable not trusting something that Bible scholars much more learned than me did not trust.

Scholars do not trust the particular version of the Book of Jasher you previously were quoting from. That isn't the case with the one I referenced for the verse regarding the time it took to build the ark.

Just because it isn't divinely inspired does not mean it is historically inaccurate. My view is that it likely isn't too far off being that 2 scripture writers under divine inspiration referenced material in the book itself. Divine inspiration means that it is actually God who was doing the referencing.

 

[FallingWaters]

Scholars do not trust the particular version of the Book of Jasher you previously were quoting from. That isn't the case with the one I referenced for the verse regarding the time it took to build the ark.

Just because it isn't divinely inspired does not mean it is historically inaccurate. My view is that it likely isn't too far off being that 2 scripture writers under divine inspiration referenced material in the book itself. Divine inspiration means that it is actually God who was doing the referencing.

I understand what you are saying, but I don't know enough to make a judgement.

 

[Floodnut]

I understand what you are saying, but I don't know enough to make a judgement.

Our discussion here should be based on examination of the Scriptures. However extrabiblical literature, even the pagan accounts of the flood are of value insofar as they confirm the True account. But with those other texts, there is always uncertainty as to their authority and present authenticity, not to mention uncertainty as to the true identity of the ancient books of the Wars of the Lord, and the Book of Jasher. Again, lets take the discussion of the Book of Jasher to another thread please.

 

[FallingWaters]

Again, lets take the discussion of the Book of Jasher to another thread please.

Amen

 

[Floodnut]

Maybe they built next to a river, in order to be able to float trees into postion. If they we in a flood plane, they could have a dam down stream and open and close to raise the water level and float materials right into place in the construction project.

The Bible is clear that they had metal tools at the time of the building of the Ark, and after the Flood Civilization sprang up rather rapidly, suggesting that the pre-Flood world had a high level of intelligence.

And did they use animals as beasts of burden?

How big was the opening in the side of the Ark. I don't imagine that they closed it all in early on, but rather that it was open for access to the progress of the building, and that near the end every thing was finished off except one LARGE opening in the side.

 

[laptoppop]

Maybe they built next to a river, in order to be able to float trees into postion. If they we in a flood plane, they could have a dam down stream and open and close to raise the water level and float materials right into place in the construction project.

The Bible is clear that they had metal tools at the time of the building of the Ark, and after the Flood Civilization sprang up rather rapidly, suggesting that the pre-Flood world had a high level of intelligence.

And did they use animals as beasts of burden?

How big was the opening in the side of the Ark. I don't imagine that they closed it all in early on, but rather that it was open for access to the progress of the building, and that near the end every thing was finished off except one LARGE opening in the side.

I concur -- I think "early" civilization was much more advanced than most people give them credit for.

About the size of the opening -- doesn't scripture confirm that it was the Lord who closed the ark? In other words - the opening could have been huge - too big to be easily closed. (although I'm sure Noah & Sons Construction, Inc. could have figured something out if they needed to)

 

[FallingWaters]

I concur -- I think "early" civilization was much more advanced than most people give them credit for.

About the size of the opening -- doesn't scripture confirm that it was the Lord who closed the ark? In other words - the opening could have been huge - too big to be easily closed. (although I'm sure Noah & Sons Construction, Inc. could have figured something out if they needed to)

I agree about early man being highly intelligent.

How big would the door really need to be? YECs are always saying they took young dinosaurs on the ark, so they wouldn't take so much room or eat so much. If they took animals that were in their early adulthood they didn't necessarily have to be huge, and so the door would really only need to be wide enough to fit the sauropods and mammoths through, right?

Genesis 7:16 - "...and the LORD shut him in."
I hadn't ever thought that God actually physically closed the door Himself, but rather once it was shut it could not be opened again, and that the people inside were being kept safe by God. In other words, God presided over the shutting and the opening.

 

[Floodnut]

TRUNCATED
. . . and so the door would really only need to be wide enough to fit the sauropods and mammoths through, right?

Genesis 7:16 - "...and the LORD shut him in."
I hadn't ever thought that God actually physically closed the door Himself, but rather once it was shut it could not be opened again, and that the people inside were being kept safe by God. In other words, God presided over the shutting and the opening.

Thank you very much for noting this. People, including myself, have often asserted, "The Bible says that God shut the door." In fact it just says ". . . and the LORD shut him in." In my mind it involves much more than just the door, but to the whole ark and its watertight condition. God sealed the ark to protect it, not just the door, but all the planks and beams. I can't imagine that there was ever any HINT of leakage.

AS to the size of the door in the side of the ark, I just feel that most depictions have made it far too small. Almost always it is just high enough that Noah could reach up and touch the top with his outstretched hand. NO WAY. It was more than TWICE his height. Each story was 15 feet tall, and I suppose the door would have been 12 or 13 feet, at least, with some of the space taken up with construction features supporting the floors above and below.