Is the fourth commandment a moral issue?

[RND]

Lets simplify things.
I'll ask you one simple question and then you can ask me one.

Why not just answer the original questions I asked?

Did God say to Noah and his sons they could eat anything that moves on the earth after the flood?

Not in the context you are thinking. So the answer would be no.

What did Moses eat before there were enough reproduction cycles past that would produce enough unclean animals to eat and not effect the overall population?

 

[sentipente]

What did Moses eat before there were enough reproduction cycles past that would produce enough unclean animals to eat and not effect the overall population?

Do you know what the population was? You are in the realm of speculation. I don't see how this question is relevant.

 

[ricker]

Not in the context you are thinking. So the answer would be no.

What context are you speaking of? Your answer would not be in my context, would it?

What did Moses eat before there were enough reproduction cycles past that would produce enough unclean animals to eat and not effect the overall population?

We are not told so to answer would be pure conjecture, of which you are quite adept.
I don't think we are told how much food was brought with in the ark and we don't know what plants were left to eat. 40 days of flood wouldn't have necessarily destroyed all plant food. Noah and his sons could have eaten some of the clean animals they sacrificed to God, but that couldn't have lasted too long.
As I said, to guess would be irresponsible and offer no basis to nullify clear commands by God.
My answer is I don't know for sure and neither can you.

My question has a definite Biblical answer. Yours does not.
God bless! Ricker

 

[sentipente]

But who says that a "biblical" answer must necessarily be what is required?

 

[RND]

What context are you speaking of?

The context I've been in my last several posts.

Your answer would not be in my context, would it?

That would be correct.

We are not told so to answer would be pure conjecture, of which you are quite adept.

Umm, hmm. So much for answering a direct question.

I don't think we are told how much food was brought with in the ark and we don't know what plants were left to eat. 40 days of flood wouldn't have necessarily destroyed all plant food.

It took 10 mos from the time the water receded for a dove (Holy Spirit) to find an olive branch.

Noah and his sons could have eaten some of the clean animals they sacrificed to God, but that couldn't have lasted too long.

So your answer then is "clean animals?" Since they didn't sacrifice unclean animals we can deduce, without conjecture, that they ate "clean" animals.

Ricker, how long do you think it would take 8 people to consume a full grown steer? A day? Maybe three? A week? What's your guess. How much green, leafy greens and vegetables do you thick those 8 souls packed away before there trip?

As I said, to guess would be irresponsible and offer no basis to nullify clear commands by God.

So, you chickened out on answering a question even though you offered to. Nice.

My answer is I don't know for sure and neither can you.

Sure we can, if we just put our thinking caps on.

My question has a definite Biblical answer. Yours does not.

That seems so grade school. What was the Bibilcal answer to your question?

 

[ricker]

The context I've been in my last several posts.

That would be correct.

Umm, hmm. So much for answering a direct question.

It took 10 mos from the time the water receded for a dove (Holy Spirit) to find an olive branch.

So your answer then is "clean animals?" Since they didn't sacrifice unclean animals we can deduce, without conjecture, that they ate "clean" animals.

Ricker, how long do you think it would take 8 people to consume a full grown steer? A day? Maybe three? A week? What's your guess. How much green, leafy greens and vegetables do you thick those 8 souls packed away before there trip?

So, you chickened out on answering a question even though you offered to. Nice.

Sure we can, if we just put our thinking caps on.

That seems so grade school. What was the Bibilcal answer to your question?

The answer is in the Bible. It is yes.
1

Then God blessed Noah and his sons, saying to them, "Be fruitful and increase in number and fill the earth. 2 The fear and dread of you will fall upon all the beasts of the earth and all the birds of the air, upon every creature that moves along the ground, and upon all the fish of the sea; they are given into your hands. 3 Everything that lives and moves will be food for you. Just as I gave you the green plants, I now give you everything.

The answer to your question is not in the Bible. It would be a guess.

They probably did eat clean animals, along with whatever else they could find. Is that a problem?

Where did they get clean water to drink? What color were Noahs shoes? Where did Noah get the wine to get drunk with? Did he bring it with him or grow the grapes and ferment them himself? How long did it take for the plants recover from the flood? Did they bring seeds with them? I won't be badgered into trying to answer a question that can't be answered. I gave you an easy one and you couldn't get it right!
God bless! Ricker

 

[sentipente]

It took 10 mos from the time the water receded for a dove (Holy Spirit) to find an olive branch.

Do you really believe the Holy Spirit needed 10 months to find a branch it could create in one second? Can we at least stop and take a wholistic view to avoid these rank contradictions.

 

[ricker]

What did Moses eat before there were enough reproduction cycles past that would produce enough unclean animals to eat and not effect the overall population?

Wait, I got the answer. They brought some food with which they used for about 8 weeks. They supplemented this with some of the eggs layed by the chickens and such. The cows and goats were milked for what their offspring didn't use. The rabbits and other small animals procreated at such a rate that by about 1 1/2 months, they had fresh meat to go with the newly growing plants they had planted. Of course all the animals could be mating and having offspring during the voyage also. so the time elapsed wouldn't be as prohibitive as you may think.
That is my answer.
God bless! Ricker

 

[RND]

Do you really believe the Holy Spirit needed 10 months to find a branch it could create in one second? Can we at least stop and take a wholistic view to avoid these rank contradictions.

Maybe it was another lesson in patience for Noah's family.

2 Cr 6:4
But in all [things] approving ourselves as the ministers of God, in much patience, in afflictions, in necessities, in distresses,

Jam 5:7
Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the coming of the Lord. Behold, the husbandman waiteth for the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for it, until he receive the early and latter rain.

2 Pe 1:6
And to knowledge temperance; and to temperance patience; and to patience godliness;

 

[RND]

The answer is in the Bible. It is yes.

1

Ricker....be honest with yourself.

Does the Bible say this is what God based His covenant with Noah on?

The answer to your question is not in the Bible. It would be a guess.

Ummm, no it would be an answer based on common sense.

They probably did eat clean animals, along with whatever else they could find. Is that a problem?

Only in you can see the mistake your argument has and just don't want to come out an admit that they ate "clean" animals, not "unclean."

probably

There's nothing probable about it. If they weren't sacrificing unclean animals they were eating clean ones.

Where did they get clean water to drink?

Most likely stored it or collected it. I don't think it rained salt water ricker. Do you think it rained salt water ricker?

What color were Noahs shoes?

Brown. Sandals made of skins.

Where did Noah get the wine to get drunk with?

From storage or he grew it. He was gone awhile. The wine would have fermented rather much.

Did he bring it with him or grow the grapes and ferment them himself?

Maybe both.

How long did it take for the plants recover from the flood?

At least 3 mos.

Did they bring seeds with them?

Yea, that seems like a definate possibility. They had a 120 years to get ready so I would certainly guess yes.

I won't be badgered into trying to answer a question that can't be answered.

You could answer those questions if you put yourself in Noah's shoes. You can do that can't you ricker?

I gave you an easy one and you couldn't get it right!

Not to your satisfaction, that's true. Hopefully though the Lord appreciates me using my thinking cap.

 

[sentipente]

Maybe it was another lesson in patience for Noah's family.

"Maybe" can be used to justify any belief. I am beginning to wonder what kind of God you really believe in. He sounds so arbitrary and is completely clueless while supposedly being omniscient.

 

[sentipente]

The Hebrews were not the first to have a flood story so quit trying to make sense of it.

 

[RND]

"Maybe" can be used to justify any belief. I am beginning to wonder what kind of God you really believe in. He sounds so arbitrary and is completely clueless while supposedly being omniscient.

Well, I can't speak for God but if I was gonna guess, I'd say He had a few more tests planned for Noah.

 

[sentipente]

On this you are correct. You have built an entire city on guesswork. Somehow you believe in a flood that did not address the root cause of the problem it was supposed to solve. Somehow God did not realize that He could not drown angels in water.

 

[RND]

On this you are correct. You have built an entire city on guesswork.

Fortunately, I serve a God that doesn't mind people asking questions.

Somehow you believe in a flood that did not address the root cause of the problem it was supposed to solve.

I'm certain that God never promised to solve any problems with the flood.

Somehow God did not realize that He could not drown angels in water.

Then that means God would not be omnipotent and couldn't know the end from the beginning. Too bad senti that you like to paint God into a corner.

 

[sentipente]

I won't even comment on the ridiculous idea that guesswork is the same as questioning. I am intrigued by your suggestion that the flood was not sent to solve any problem. You believe in a God who just decided to kill a whole bunch of people. Is that what you are saying?

 

[ricker]

1

Ricker....be honest with yourself.

Does the Bible say this is what God based His covenant with Noah on?

Be honest with yourself RND. Did God give all things that move to Noah and his sons for food or not? Your diversionary tactics of asking what the covenant was based on is completely irrelevant to this issue. Show me anything that would invalidate Gods plain word and I will listen.

Only in you can see the mistake your argument has and just don't want to come out an admit that they ate "clean" animals, not "unclean."

They ate clean, they ate unlcean. This is obvoius!

There's nothing probable about it. If they weren't sacrificing unclean animals they were eating clean ones.

The reason they brought more clean animals was for sacrifices. God said they could eat anything that moves on the earth. This is undeniable.

You could answer those questions if you put yourself in Noah's shoes. You can do that can't you ricker?

You know, I answered your question in post #149

 

[RND]

Be honest with yourself RND. Did God give all things that move to Noah and his sons for food or not?

Not.

Your diversionary tactics of asking what the covenant was based on is completely irrelevant to this issue. Show me anything that would invalidate Gods plain word and I will listen.

I'll take that as an admission thenthat God's covenant with Noah was not based on food.

ricker, ask you pastor that question. Was God's covenant with Noah based on food? Note the look on his face before he answers you.

They ate clean, they ate unlcean. This is obvoius!

No, they only ate clean. Show me where Noah sacrificed an unclean animals ricker.

The reason they brought more clean animals was for sacrifices.

Right, which were giant bar-b-ques ricker. They ate the meat, they didn't waste it.

God said they could eat anything that moves on the earth. This is undeniable.

In context they could eat that which they brought ricker. Again, if they ate one of the pigs for food then then would have only been one pig left. Rabbits, same thing. Snakes, same thing.

You know, I answered your question in post #149

I'm sorry, I missed it.

Wait, I got the answer. They brought some food with which they used for about 8 weeks.

Keep in mind they were on the boat for almost a year.

They supplemented this with some of the eggs layed by the chickens and such. The cows and goats were milked for what their offspring didn't use.

That's indeed a possibility.

The rabbits and other small animals procreated at such a rate that by about 1 1/2 months, they had fresh meat to go with the newly growing plants they had planted.

It takes longer than 1 1/2 months to grow full sized plants and full sized rabbits.

Why would they eat rabbits when then were sacrificing cows? Steak versus rabbit? Is there even a question?

Of course all the animals could be mating and having offspring during the voyage also. so the time elapsed wouldn't be as prohibitive as you may think.
That is my answer.

Well, that was fairly well thought out for a man than didn't want to be so presumptuous towards God. Very good.

My only question is this. If they took the clean animals for sacrifice, and as a result ate the sacrifice, why the need to eat unclean animals ricker?

 

[ricker]

So long for now, RND!
I gotta go teach a youth confirmation class at our church and then I'm in a play for our Ash Wed. service.
God bless! Ricker

 

[RND]

So long for now, RND!

Toodle-lue ricker!

I gotta go teach a youth confirmation class at our church and then I'm in a play for our Good Friday service.

Sounds like a fun filled evening. Enjoy!