Noahs Arc?

[Sphere]

Correct me if im wrong, but what is the story behind Noahs Arc? He set sail with 2 of each animal AFTER the great flood. How did he get 2 each animal, especially with continents and locations that have JUST been discovered. Such as Komodo Island, Antarctica. Did god tell him of these locations(since obviously know one knew they existed back then) or is there something less than the story?

 

[Mavrick]

Ok, I’ll correct you….

First, Noah did NOT set sail AFTER the flood, but was instructed by God to build the Ark BEFORE the flood. In fact, God gave him the directions for building the Ark. (See Genesis 6)

As for the animals, if God could create the world, and everything in it, and knew He was going to flood the earth, why is it so hard to figure that he could have commanded two of each animal to go to the place that Noah was building the ark? (Read Genesis 7)

Many times people tell me that it would be impossible for this to have taken place, but then with God ALL things are possible.

I hope this answers all your questions. If not, just ask.

Mav.

 

[HeatherJay]

Yep, what Mavrick said Also, there was no "setting sail"...it was more like Noah loaded the animals and his family into the Ark and just waited for the rains to come.


Love, Heather

 

[Blindfaith]

Based on historical fact, the continents may have looked very different that they look now - I really don't know since I wasn't there (I hope I'm not that old ).

But if God can breathe life into man, and create all the inhabitants nonetheless their home, it's not far to deduce that He could call all those creatures to the Ark. And something else that I've heard Evolutionists say: "what about the dinosaurs - they're just too big". Is there any proof that those dinasours were full grown? No. That Ark was HUGE - about as big as our football stadium here. If you want dimensions, I'll be happy to provide them.

One other thing to consider about Noah. Have you gone to a football or baseball game at a major stadium and witnessed a person on the street corner preaching about John 3:16? THAT was Noah in his day - he didn't just quietly sit aside while God told him to build an ark and do nothing. He was an evangelist and told all those in his vicinity to repent of their sins because God's wrath was about to come. But they didn't listen. Just as many don't listen today.

So the next time someone sees a "street corner evangelist" and ridicules them, think of Noah because he did the same thing - and we see what happened. It would do us well to read, learn and listen to history.

/me steps off her soapbox

 

[IvoryRain]

As for continents and locations - I don't believe the world is as it once was.

Shifting and changes are bound to happen over vast ammounts of time.

 

[TheBear]

And something else that I've heard Evolutionists say: "what about the dinosaurs - they're just too big".

That's interesting, especially since the ToE has the dinosaurs extinct long before man entered the picture. They probably did not know too much about the ToE, to be asking those kinds of questions.

 

[hotarugari]

But if God can breathe life into man, and create all the inhabitants nonetheless their home, it's not far to deduce that He could call all those creatures to the Ark. And something else that I've heard Evolutionists say: "what about the dinosaurs - they're just too big". Is there any proof that those dinasours were full grown? No. That Ark was HUGE - about as big as our football stadium here. If you want dimensions, I'll be happy to provide them.

Yeah, the common answer I always hear is that they could have been baby dinosaurs. Of course, you could also check your Hebrew and see if some of the more terror causing beasts fell under the definition of animal for them. It is possible that they grouped them differently than we do today.

 

[Sphere]

Okay..fair enough, ill play the game for a little bit.

Oh, what did all of the carnivores eat AFTER leaving the Ark?
(This is not a question about what they ate on the Ark.) In other words, explain how the food chain worked when there was merely 2 of each animal.

 

[Rising_Suns]

Oh, what did all of the carnivores eat AFTER leaving the Ark?
(This is not a question about what they ate on the Ark.) In other words, explain how the food chain worked when there was merely 2 of each animal.

My friend,
I could go into some reasonably logical explination, but really all these questions boil down to faith in God's abililty to do something. But I suppose I'll play along as well. Lets imgaine, that just as quickly as the flood came, it also left just as quickly. So there is much reason to believe that many sea creatures could have run aground providing food...and don't forget about all the sea creatures still in the sea.

 

[Sphere]

My friend,
I could go into some reasonably logical explination, but really all these questions boil down to faith in God's abililty to do something. But I suppose I'll play along as well. Lets imgaine, that just as quickly as the flood came, it also left just as quickly. So there is much reason to believe that many sea creatures could have run aground providing food...and don't forget about all the sea creatures still in the sea.

Noahs Arc is riddled with problems. First of all, if the flood happened many of todays species of fish would be extinct. Thousands of species of fish require clear water, some need brackish water, many more need ocean water to survive. A flood would of destroyed all of these different water habitats and these species of fish would of been killed. Many carnivores will not eat dead creatures, and many cannot survive on fish.

Certain species of snakes for instance will not eat types of 'sea creatures' and almost all snakes will not eat food that is old and rotting. There are even animals that don't life long, many types of insects only survive a few days. Adult mayfies on the arc would of died in only 2 or 3 days, and their larvae require shallow fresh running water.

You really think all these special provisions needed for the thousands upon thousands of animals took place? Technically, most human-born disease wouldn't of survived the flood. For example, measles cant last for more than a few weeks in a population of 250,000 people because its needs a nonresistant host to infect. Considering there were merely 8 people on the arc, measles would of been EXTICT. Care to explain anything i've mentioned above?

 

[Rising_Suns]

Noahs Arc is riddled with problems. First of all, if the flood happened many of todays species of fish would be extinct.

God never said that He would save all creatures from exinction.

Considering there were merely 8 people on the arc, measles would of been EXTICT.

Just like life, measles had a source of origination. Even if measles became extinct, who's to say that it didn't originate again?

Mr friend,
I don't know what your intentions are here though, but it doesn't seem like you really want to learn about Christianity. If I am wrong, please let me know.

Suggestion to other mods: Maybe this thread would be better suited in apologetics?

 

[hotarugari]

Okay..fair enough, ill play the game for a little bit.

Oh, what did all of the carnivores eat AFTER leaving the Ark?
(This is not a question about what they ate on the Ark.) In other words, explain how the food chain worked when there was merely 2 of each animal.

Well, some of the animals they had more than 2 of. Like the cattle for instance, but I suppose that meant they still had to do alot of fishing.

Even still, in the ark with it's dimensions, it is said there wasn't too much natural light in there, so many of the animals were in or close to a sleep state for about a year.

And some of animals could have bred quite quickly. Like the rabbits for instance and the rats.

Keeping fresh water would have been one of the only problems, except that the oceans were not as saline as they are today.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Well, some of the animals they had more than 2 of. Like the cattle for instance, but I suppose that meant they still had to do alot of fishing.

Even still, in the ark with it's dimensions, it is said there wasn't too much natural light in there, so many of the animals were in or close to a sleep state for about a year.

And some of animals could have bred quite quickly. Like the rabbits for instance and the rats.

Keeping fresh water would have been one of the only problems, except that the oceans were not as saline as they are today.

I think this might be better over in one of the science and evolution fora, because that's where this sort of thing gets discussed.

Two quick points:

(1) Many (most?) Christians do not think there was a historical worldwide flood
(2) Whether there was or wasn't doesn't have any real implications for the truth or otherwise of the Christian faith. It's only an unholy alliance of militant atheists and fundamentalists who think it does.

 

[hotarugari]

I think this might be better over in one of the science and evolution fora, because that's where this sort of thing gets discussed.

Two quick points:

(1) Many (most?) Christians do not think there was a historical worldwide flood
(2) Whether there was or wasn't doesn't have any real implications for the truth or otherwise of the Christian faith. It's only an unholy alliance of militant atheists and fundamentalists who think it does.

Two quick points:
(1) What you have to realize is that the flood is one of the best documented events older than 2000 years. We have several biological artifiacts that would seem to correlate as well as stories from several different groups.

(2) The existance of a flood is important, unless you are interpretting Genesis as some fairy tale, which would make you what kind of Christian?
Anyway, Genesis has never been interpreted by any real scholar as purely symbolic. I would note that the creation accounts are at best a simplified explanation of what happened, meant to give the least intellectual some grounding as to how things have come about. Still the book of Genesis is meant to be an explanation of beginnings and it seems to serve its purpose.

 

[hotarugari]

Noahs Arc is riddled with problems. First of all, if the flood happened many of todays species of fish would be extinct. Thousands of species of fish require clear water, some need brackish water, many more need ocean water to survive. A flood would of destroyed all of these different water habitats and these species of fish would of been killed. Many carnivores will not eat dead creatures, and many cannot survive on fish.

I believe it has been well documented that the water has not always been this saline. 5000 years ago, it was probably comparible to fresh water or at least sulpher water.

Many carnivores will not eat dead creatures, and many cannot survive on fish.

Will they eat rats, or rabbits, or other quickly multiplying animals?
Who says that there had to remain only two creatures of each type the whole time?

Certain species of snakes for instance will not eat types of 'sea creatures' and almost all snakes will not eat food that is old and rotting. There are even animals that don't life long, many types of insects only survive a few days. Adult mayfies on the arc would of died in only 2 or 3 days, and their larvae require shallow fresh running water.

It's possible that the flood was not covering the entire earth. If you suddenly heard reports of the whole united states being totally under water, it wouldn't be hard to imagine the rest of the world under water. Point being, this is a first person witness account that has been passed down by word of mouth.

Were there any other survivors?

Noah sure didn't see any. It doesn't mean there weren't, just that he didn't see them.

Besides this, if the whole earth really was totally covered, if could be contrived as good support for evolution.

You really think all these special provisions needed for the thousands upon thousands of animals took place? Technically, most human-born disease wouldn't of survived the flood. For example, measles cant last for more than a few weeks in a population of 250,000 people because its needs a nonresistant host to infect. Considering there were merely 8 people on the arc, measles would of been EXTICT. Care to explain anything i've mentioned above?

Maybe it was only a hundred that differentiated back out into thousands?

After all, 8 people became several races right?
Didn't they trace all the mitochondria genes back to one human mother?

Or are you going to argue for no flood and no differentiation (evolution or natural selection)?

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

Two quick points:
(1) What you have to realize is that the flood is one of the best documented events older than 2000 years. We have several biological artifiacts that would seem to correlate as well as stories from several different groups.

Always from groups who settled in flood plains. Interesting that. What is perplexing is how the Egyptian and Chinese cultures managed to go right through this flood period without noticing it. If you want to discuss biological artefacts you think support the flood (I have a myriad in mind that falsify it) then this should be discussed on one of the science forums, which I am happy to do.

(2) The existance of a flood is important, unless you are interpretting Genesis as some fairy tale

No, a myth. Not the same at all.

which would make you what kind of Christian?

One who recognises myth when he sees it?

Anyway, Genesis has never been interpreted by any real scholar as purely symbolic.

Is that the skirl of a "real Scotsman's" bagpipes I hear?

I would note that the creation accounts are at best a simplified explanation of what happened, meant to give the least intellectual some grounding as to how things have come about. Still the book of Genesis is meant to be an explanation of beginnings and it seems to serve its purpose.

Indeed. As long as we recognise its purpose was neither scientific nor historical.

 

[Karl - Liberal Backslider]

I believe it has been well documented that the water has not always been this saline. 5000 years ago, it was probably comparible to fresh water or at least sulpher water.

Far from it. The sea appears to be in equilibrium, and there's no reason to suppose it's been any different for millons of years.

It's possible that the flood was not covering the entire earth. If you suddenly heard reports of the whole united states being totally under water, it wouldn't be hard to imagine the rest of the world under water. Point being, this is a first person witness account that has been passed down by word of mouth.

And turned into a theological myth in the process.

Besides this, if the whole earth really was totally covered, if could be contrived as good support for evolution.

Not really. We'd expect all species to show a genetic bottlenect around 4,000 years ago. They don't.

Maybe it was only a hundred that differentiated back out into thousands?

Or millions. Just beetles alone. But there's not been any noticeable change in biodiversity in historical times, so I don't see how this hyper-evolution is going to manage in a few thousand. They don't have much time - the extant range of big cats, for example, was known to the Egyptians 4,000 years ago.

After all, 8 people became several races right?

No. The human population appears to have been down to a few thousand at one point, but never 8.

Didn't they trace all the mitochondria genes back to one human mother?

Yes. She seems to have lived about 100,000 years ago.

Or are you going to argue for no flood and no differentiation (evolution or natural selection)?

I'm going to argue for no cataclysmic flood and no significant differentiation since the period in which the flood story is set.

 

[Rafael]

Grasping the truth about God always ends up with Him being impotent in man's imagination. It's always interesting to see how He has accomplished His work, but sometimes giving the writers of the Bible the benefit of the doubt would be a better place to start from in seeking truth about miracles.
Good proof would start with the average size of animals and the dimensions of the ark, which has been done. Basically, it is big enough to carry all the animals of the planet and feed them for the forty plus days it had to float. It had to be a miracle for the animals to come two by two and be loaded onto the ark, and how God did that is privy to the mind of God and may defy the limited knowledge and logic that man is forced into while existing in this cursed dimension of time and death. God, being able to operate outside of time, has capabilities we cannot explain by our best efforts. It does become a matter of faith and submission to God's power. By our fallen nature, we believe that we create the world around us by our very conciousness, and the "pride of life", as the Bible calls it, drives man to usurp God's power for himself and claim some power if by only being able to put names on things and understand a little of his environment God has given him. This "pride of life" lets man think he wakes himself each day instead of giving God the thanks and glory for each moment of life given. This arrogance and pride is naturally inherited from Adam, the father of all mankind, who received the curse in the garden. Ofcourse, this is all disputed too, and it does not surprise me that a majority of the Bible is not believed as truth or accurate. Without faith, man always becomes God and master in his imagination, as it is the unregenerated man's nature to do so. As a man submits himsrlf to God and bends his knee, the Holy Spirit leads that man into all truth about himself and what God requires.

 

[Sphere]

I believe it has been well documented that the water has not always been this saline. 5000 years ago, it was probably comparible to fresh water or at least sulpher water.

The salinity of the water strongly affects the organisms that live in it. If the ocean as you say was more comparible to fresh or sulpher water almost all sea life as we know today would be extint. Corals are extremely sensitive to their enviornment. Even if there was a flood of any sort(assuming also it was salt water) the coral life would of been cut off from sunlight and died out. Most corals are found in shallow water, and need to be near the water surface to survive.

Will they eat rats, or rabbits, or other quickly multiplying animals?
Who says that there had to remain only two creatures of each type the whole time?

Okay, i'll use Lions and Tigers as my example here. Lions and tigers need to eat 10 pounds of meat per day to stay healthy. Given there were 2 lions and 2 tigers thats 40 pounds of meat they needed to survive per day. If you fed them with rats, they would be consuming 80 rats per day(since rats weigh less than half a pound and barely have any meat to begin with). If you fed them with rabits(which weigh 1 pound each) you would need to feed them 40 rabits a day to stay healthy. Do the math for a trip at sea that lasts 40 days. Noah would of needed 1600 rabits or 3200 rats to keep a pair of lion and tiger healthy during the trip. Neither of these two animals can reproduce fast enough to keep up with just the feeding demand of 2 tigers and 2 lions. So, considering Noah couldnt keep 2 tigers and 2 lions alive on rats and rabits, how did he manage to keep every carnivore alive(carnivores on the ship and after all the animals departed from the ship)??

Were there any other survivors?

Noah sure didn't see any. It doesn't mean there weren't, just that he didn't see them.

Did the bible say there were survivors? If not then don't be adding to the bible in an attempt to make your arguement valid.

Besides this, if the whole earth really was totally covered, if could be contrived as good support for evolution.

Maybe it was only a hundred that differentiated back out into thousands?

No, evolution takes hundreds of thousands of years if not millions to take any real noticable effects on a species.

After all, 8 people became several races right?
Didn't they trace all the mitochondria genes back to one human mother?

Or are you going to argue for no flood and no differentiation (evolution or natural selection)?

No, 8 people did not become several races in that short amount of time. The flood never happened, there's too much evidence against such an event ever happening.

 

[Glausfan]

Check those links which refute Noah's worldwide flood:

"Beyond Creation Science"
truthinliving.org/Reformer/Flood.htm

"Noah's Flood: Global or Local?"
angelfire.com/ca/DeafPreterist/noah.html

Just copy and paste and then add "www" to access.