Noah's ark - How??

[EnemyPartyII]

So some "kinds" had to perish to keep the predators alive. Did God thought about that?

Indeed! Unless of course, thats what happened to the dinosaurs...

 

[Upisoft]

Indeed! Unless of course, thats what happened to the dinosaurs...

I just had a glimpse of vision.
Two lions in a tank chasing a T.Rex
How did they kill them otherwise?
Well, surely I have a wild imagination, but that Noah story is too much for me...

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I just had a glimpse of vision.
Two lions in a tank chasing a T.Rex

Oh, T.rex is actually a vegetarian, and died out because of the inavailability of large foliage after the flood. Don't you know anything?

 

[Upisoft]

Oh, T.rex is actually a vegetarian, and died out because of the inavailability of large foliage after the flood. Don't you know anything?

Forgive me for being uneducated on the subject. I promise to try hard and fill the gaps.

In the light of the new facts, I want to propose the theory that will solve the problem. All animals were vegetarian, including lions, tigers, etc. I even have a proof! My cat eats grass.

After the Flood some of them were possessed by the "dark side", but not before there were enough to keep the population reproducible.

What do you think about that theory?

 

[Calminian]

Oh, T.rex is actually a vegetarian, and died out because of the inavailability of large foliage after the flood. Don't you know anything?

I think all your objections have been answered, EPII. The reason you don't believe the ark happened is because you don't believe in a God who can perform miracles like controlling animals. Your objections have nothing to do with science and everything to do with your worldview. You would rather believe in a universe that popped into existence uncaused for no reason, than in a God that intervenes and interacts with His creation. I personally couldn't muster the blind faith necessary for atheism, but I can see you have. Hopefully, one day, you'll decide to think it through.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

I think all your objections have been answered, EPII. The reason you don't believe the ark happened is because you don't believe in a God who can perform miracles like controlling animals. Your objections have nothing to do with science and everything to do with your worldview. You would rather believe in a universe that popped into existence uncaused for no reason, than in a God that intervenes and interacts with His creation. I personally couldn't muster the blind faith necessary for atheism, but I can see you have. Hopefully, one day, you'll decide to think it through.

Poe's?

 

[Seekermeister]

Forgive me for being uneducated on the subject. I promise to try hard and fill the gaps.

In the light of the new facts, I want to propose the theory that will solve the problem. All animals were vegetarian, including lions, tigers, etc. I even have a proof! My cat eats grass.

After the Flood some of them were possessed by the "dark side", but not before there were enough to keep the population reproducible.

What do you think about that theory?

It's more than a theory (except the "darkside" remark). I was looking for scripture on this last night, and couldn't find it, but I know that I have read it somewhere in the Bible before. But, since the dinosaurs came from an era outside of the Biblical history and chronology, they are not included in this scenario.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

It's more than a theory (except the "darkside" remark). I was looking for scripture on this last night, and couldn't find it, but I know that I have read it somewhere in the Bible before. But, since the dinosaurs came from an era outside of the Biblical history and chronology, they are not included in this scenario.

How can dinosaurs be from outside Biblical history when Biblical history starts with creation?

Dinosaurs preceded creation???

 

[Seekermeister]

How can dinosaurs be from outside Biblical history when Biblical history starts with creation?

Dinosaurs preceded creation???

I have posted this elsewhere on this forum, but since you apparently didn't read it, I shall repeat it.

In the first two verses of the Bible it says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (This says that the creation of the heaven and the earth were prior to the chronology that followed.) "And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters." (The word "was" in the first sentence, is a mistranslation of the Hebrew, and it should be "became".)

With this understood, it should be clear that the Earth existed long before the age which began with Adam and Eve, and had lifeforms that not known in this Earth age. The dinosaurs came from this earlier era.

 

[Upisoft]

In the first two verses of the Bible it says "In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth." (This says that the creation of the heaven and the earth were prior to the chronology that followed.) "And the earth was without form and empty. And darkness was on the face of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved on the face of the waters." (The word "was" in the first sentence, is a mistranslation of the Hebrew, and it should be "became".)

With this understood, it should be clear that the Earth existed long before the age which began with Adam and Eve, and had lifeforms that not known in this Earth age. The dinosaurs came from this earlier era.

And that part "And the earth was without form and empty" means what? Empty stands for "filled with dinosaurs"?

 

[Seekermeister]

And that part "And the earth was without form and empty" means what? Empty stands for "filled with dinosaurs"?

Firstly, it should be "And the earth became without form and empty". I do not understand why an explanation is necessary, but I shall try anyway. That the Earth became without form, meant that it became inundated with water (dry land existed previously), with no land at the surface...somewhat like Noah's flood. That the Earth became empty, says that it was not so previously. This void indicates previous lifeforms. The fossil record is an image of what these previous lifeforms were like...i.e. dinosaurs, etc.

 

[Upisoft]

Firstly, it should be "And the earth became without form and empty". I do not understand why an explanation is necessary, but I shall try anyway. That the Earth became without form, meant that it became inundated with water (dry land existed previously), with no land at the surface...somewhat like Noah's flood. That the Earth became empty, says that it was not so previously. This void indicates previous lifeforms. The fossil record is an image of what these previous lifeforms were like...i.e. dinosaurs, etc.

Yes. I need explanation. I want to see how you think.
It's really interesting to see how you build a theory on sequence of assumptions, without any proof.

Assumption 1: Of all people that had translated the Bible from original text, only you have the right translation. Any proof on that? And don't you feel ashamed. If you really have the right translation, you must publish it, or your fellow Christian brothers and sisters will go to hell, because of you!

Assumption 2: "became empty" means "there were dinosaurs or whatever fossil record shows". Can't it mean "there were angels", "there were machines for making mountains", whatever? Why exactly "became empty" should mean that what was removed was necessarily lifeform? Perhaps billions tons of lead could fit there nicely...

Assumption 3: "became without form" means "became inundated with water". Well sphere is a form. Couldn't it mean something different instead? That the space was so distorted that there were only 2 dimensions, hence the Earth had shape, but not 3D form. Or, perhaps, Earth had no physical form, it only existed in the Gods plans.

I hope you got it. If you start using assumptions instead real data, you can "prove" almost everything. Only imagination is your limitation.

 

[Seekermeister]

Upisoft,

Since I am not the subject at hand, I have no desire to attempt to respond to your "assumptions", because if you fail to understand what I have said, you would also fail to understand responses also. It seems apparent that you have a greater interest in winning a debate, than in find the truth.

 

[Deiphage]

I personally couldn't muster the blind faith necessary for atheism, but I can see you have. Hopefully, one day, you'll decide to think it through.

I take offense to this statement. I don't rely only on blind faith, I ask questions like any healthy person should do. I just don't think that Christianity answers those questions.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

With this understood, it should be clear that the Earth existed long before the age which began with Adam and Eve, and had lifeforms that not known in this Earth age. The dinosaurs came from this earlier era.

The dinosaurs came from an age before the 6 days of creation huh? Interesting they were apparently so successful without either plants or sunlight.

 

[PenelopePitstop2]

It's more than a theory (except the "darkside" remark). I was looking for scripture on this last night, and couldn't find it, but I know that I have read it somewhere in the Bible before. But, since the dinosaurs came from an era outside of the Biblical history and chronology, they are not included in this scenario.

I know Genesi 9 explains that prior to the flood Noah was vegetarian and God now said he could eat animals for food.

There is a scripture in Isaiah 65v25 that talk of lions eating strw like the Ox but this refers to the new world.

Although it makes sense though if animals were vegetarian pre flood form a husbandry point of view, not sure I can support it with scripture though.

Dinosaurs I believe were around atAdams time and were wiped out by the flood as this is consistant with the way they have been fossilised. Why they were not on the ark. Don't know. Perhaps they missed the boat!!

 

[EnemyPartyII]

Dinosaurs I believe were around atAdams time and were wiped out by the flood as this is consistant with the way they have been fossilised. Why they were not on the ark. Don't know. Perhaps they missed the boat!!

How do you figure dinosaur fossils are consistent with what one would find after a global flood?

 

[PenelopePitstop2]

To make fossils you have to have certain conditions. If a body dies naturallyl for example it simply decays. Leaving some matter but not like with fossils which are often found in the middle of doing something proving death was quick and unexpected.

Catastrophic burial in sandy flood sediment is so immediate that an animal could be completely immobilized and buried before it had much chance to react. In fact, there have been fish buried so rapidly that they didn’t finish swallowing their dinner. There was also such a quick burial of an Ichthyosaur that didn’t finish giving birth. There are also examples of dinasaurs fighting, eating and all other manner of activity. Whatever buried them was quick.

The Flood would provide the sand, the mineral-dense sediment and the water needed to replace bone with rocky materials, and it would also bury these animals quickly, leaving them with little chance

The other interesting thing that archeologists and geologists have found is dinosaur footprints in various rock. The funny thing is to get the exact same type of print you need to wade in water. They recreated this theory with live newts and compared to found newts footprints and found that the patterns were the same.The other intersting thing abou the footprints is that they appear to be runing away rather than just walking or runing about.

Perhaps when the floodwaters rose these animals were fleeing the rising water and then were overcome by a huge deluge of water.

 

[EnemyPartyII]

The Flood would provide the sand, the mineral-dense sediment and the water needed to replace bone with rocky materials, and it would also bury these animals quickly, leaving them with little chance

uhuh... so, where did all that sediment come from? And the water, for that matter...

 

[PenelopePitstop2]

Sediment would come from the sea floor and land as the waters rose.

The waters came from the sky the bible mentions this in Genesis and from the deep i.e. under the ocean. See below from an article I recently read.

The “fountains of the great deep” are mentioned before the “windows of heaven,” indicating either relative importance or the order of events.

What are the “fountains of the great deep?” This phrase is used only in Genesis 7:11. “Fountains of the deep” is used in Genesis 8:2, where it clearly refers to the same thing, and Proverbs 8:28, where the precise meaning is not clear. “The great deep” is used three other times: Isaiah 51:10, where it clearly refers to the ocean; Amos 7:4, where God’s fire of judgement is said to dry up the great deep, probably the oceans; and Psalm 36:6 where it is used metaphorically of the depth of God’s justice/judgement. “The deep” is used more often, and usually refers to the oceans (e.g., Genesis 1:2; Job 38:30, 41:32; Psalm 42:7, 104:6; Isaiah 51:10, 63:13; Ezekiel 26:19; Jonah 2:3), but sometimes to subterranean sources of water (Ezekiel 31:4, 15). The Hebrew word (mayan) translated “fountains” means “fountain, spring, well.”

So, the “fountains of the great deep” are probably oceanic or possibly subterranean sources of water. In the context of the flood account, it could mean both.

If the fountains of the great deep were the major source of the waters, then they must have been a huge source of water. Some have suggested that when God made the dry land appear from under the waters on the third day of creation, some of the water that covered the earth became trapped underneath and within the dry land.

Genesis 7:11 says that on the day the flood began, there was a “breaking up” of the fountains, which implies a release of the water, possibly through large fissures in the ground or in the sea floor. The waters that had been held back burst forth with catastrophic consequences.

There are many volcanic rocks interspersed between the fossil layers in the rock record—layers that were obviously deposited during Noah’s flood. So it is quite plausible that these fountains of the great deep involved a series of volcanic eruptions with prodigious amounts of water bursting up through the ground. It is interesting that up to 70 percent or more of what comes out of volcanoes today is water, often in the form of steam.

In their catastrophic plate tectonics model for the flood, Austin et al. have proposed that at the onset of the flood, the ocean floor rapidly lifted up to 6,500 feet (2,000 meters) due to an increase in temperature as horizontal movement of the tectonic plates accelerated.3 This would spill the seawater onto the land and cause massive flooding—perhaps what is aptly described as the breaking up of the “fountains of the great deep.”