Noah's Ark Would Have Broken in Half

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
The Ark was a box, so there could hardly be a worse design. Made of wood, and being so large, it would naturally leak. It it had a keel, the water could accumulate in a trough where it could be bailed. In a large box, the water would be spread out where it couldn't be bailed out.
Back to the drawing board.....

Someone fibbed to you, their story is all wet...... care to say who it was ?

Look into the true descriptions of the ARKS sea-worthiness, thousands of years ago, and in recent years as built......
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
The Ark was a box, so there could hardly be a worse design. Made of wood, and being so large, it would naturally leak. It it had a keel, the water could accumulate in a trough where it could be bailed. In a large box, the water would be spread out where it couldn't be bailed out.
I worked up a calculation once upon a time based on cedar (since we don't really know what "gopher wood" was) and the idea that the Ark was really a raft with superstructure. That is, the part of the Ark below the waterline was solid wood. It wouldn't leak, and it would withstand considerable more flexing than a conventional hull.
Creationists didn't like the idea, even though it solved a number of the engineering problems which skeptics come up with.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,178
1,226
71
Sebring, FL
✟664,282.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
Matthew 24:36-39 (ESV)

"But concerning that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven, nor the Son, but the Father only. For as were the days of Noah, so will be the coming of the Son of Man. For as in those days before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they were unaware until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of Man."

Here Jesus is speaking of a time and an event that He seems to believe actually happened and is representative of how it will be at His 2nd coming. If Jesus said it, it is reason enough to believe it - the ark did not break in half - and we're all here today as evidence it did not.


Jesus referred to the story of Noah as a story that His listeners would be familiar with. He was trying to make a moral point and issue a warning to the Israelites at that time. This tells us nothing about what is historically true.
 
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Ted,

I'm not sure you bothered to read my post except to see the name "Augustine" and turn up your nose. It's not about "what the Catholic organization believes." I am not Catholic. I used a Dominican site as a source on the history of Christian theology. When Protestants get their act together and provide comparable resources, I will use them. You seem to regard non-creationists as hecklers who just came in the door at the last minute. This isn't true at all.

Aurelius Augustine's City of God is a seminal work of Christian theology. Protestant theology goes back to Augustine. Martin Luther was an Augustinian monk before the Reformation. The Protestant reformers adopted Augustine's theology lock, stock and barrel, no questions asked, with a few obvious exceptions. If you are a Protestant, this is where your theology comes from as well.

The fact is that Augustine, the seminal theologian in the history of Christian thought, realized that the six days of creation probably isn't literal. He realized this despite the immense limitations of the physical and biological sciences during his lifetime. It is disappointing that so many living today don't share his insight.

Hi dale,

Maybe, maybe not. I'm curious. When Martin Luther wrote his manifesto, was he supporting what he'd been taught under the Augustinian system or was he denying it? I can't speak for protestants and what they believe. I've always been the kind to see the world in only two colors. Those who are born again and those who aren't. Protestants, baptists, Catholic are just some form of separation that shouldn't exist among those who are born again. Those who are children of God are enjoined by the Holy Spirit, who, according to Jesus, leads those so filled, into all truth.

I'm sorry that you believe that I merely read the word Augustine and turned up my nose. I have actually turned up my nose at a lot of what the ECF's have written. As I said, I'm a straight Scripture kind of guy. I take very seriously what Paul said. It is the Scriptures which are good for correction, rebuke and training so that one may be found righteous. Not the writings of the ECF's or the book of Mormon or the Quaran or any other writings of men. All Scripture is God-breathed. Not the writings of the ECF's or the book of Mormon or the Quaran. These other writings are just the writings of men using their own natural knowledge and wisdom. Now, some of them may be correct in their understanding, but some of them may not. The test is whether or not it align's with the Scriptures. According to Paul, the Bereans were most noble because they put even his words to the test of Scripture.

Listen, I'm sure that Augustine was a great man of faith in his day. I'm just as sure that all the popes that have ever served in the line of Catholicism have all been great men of faith in their time. However, just for your enjoyment, here's an article that actually seems to make the point that Augustine isn't the old earther that many believe him to have been. The problem is, and this is always true of ancient writings outside of the Scriptures, we don't have the ability to ask the author what he actually meant when his writings can be ambiguous. So, wise men read the words and pore over them and then try to determine the truth. They may get it right and they may not and there's honestly no way to know.

Augustine on the Days of Creation

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
 
Upvote 0

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Hi dale,

Maybe, maybe not. I'm curious. When Martin Luther wrote his manifesto, was he supporting what he'd been taught under the Augustinian system or was he denying it? I can't speak for protestants and what they believe. I've always been the kind to see the world in only two colors. Those who are born again and those who aren't. Protestants, baptists, Catholic are just some form of separation that shouldn't exist among those who are born again. Those who are children of God are enjoined by the Holy Spirit, who, according to Jesus, leads those so filled, into all truth.

I'm sorry that you believe that I merely read the word Augustine and turned up my nose. I have actually turned up my nose at a lot of what the ECF's have written. As I said, I'm a straight Scripture kind of guy. I take very seriously what Paul said. It is the Scriptures which are good for correction, rebuke and training so that one may be found righteous. Not the writings of the ECF's or the book of Mormon or the Quaran or any other writings of men. All Scripture is God-breathed. Not the writings of the ECF's or the book of Mormon or the Quaran. These other writings are just the writings of men using their own natural knowledge and wisdom. Now, some of them may be correct in their understanding, but some of them may not. The test is whether or not it align's with the Scriptures. According to Paul, the Bereans were most noble because they put even his words to the test of Scripture.

Listen, I'm sure that Augustine was a great man of faith in his day. I'm just as sure that all the popes that have ever served in the line of Catholicism have all been great men of faith in their time. However, just for your enjoyment, here's an article that actually seems to make the point that Augustine isn't the old earther that many believe him to have been. The problem is, and this is always true of ancient writings outside of the Scriptures, we don't have the ability to ask the author what he actually meant when his writings can be ambiguous. So, wise men read the words and pore over them and then try to determine the truth. They may get it right and they may not and there's honestly no way to know.

Augustine on the Days of Creation

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
I don't think anyone supposes that Augustine was an "old earther." What the study of Augustine does reveal is that he did not take the same line on it as modern YECs. There is no hint in Augustine that belief in YECism is necessary for salvation, nor any justification for the hostility and even violence routinely meted out by YECs today to those Christians who don't "believe the Bible"--which why, I suspect, people like yourself "turn up your nose" at him. As for the Fathers, you have people like Clement, mentored by Peter and selected by him to be sucessor Bishop of Rome. What could he possibly know about Christian doctrine? Or Ignatius and Polycarp, students of John the Apostle himself? Might as well throw their writings right in the trash. Which is better, I suppose, than misrepresenting them like one poster (on this very board) who tried to convince me that the Apostolic Fathers secretly believe in Sola Scriptura even though they taught something else.
 
Upvote 0

NobleMouse

We have nothing, if not belief in the Lord
Sep 19, 2017
662
230
47
Mid West
✟47,512.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Jesus referred to the story of Noah as a story that His listeners would be familiar with. He was trying to make a moral point and issue a warning to the Israelites at that time. This tells us nothing about what is historically true.
Hello sir! Thank you for your perspective on the subject. All the same I'll hold fast to believing it truly happened since it is written in scripture and Jesus himself made reference to it in describing His second coming.

Friend, be wary of the false doctrines we are constantly bombarded with that is so ingrained within our culture today. 2 Peter 3:3 tells us "knowing this first of all, that scoffers will come in the last days with scoffing, following their own sinful desires. Some scientists today believe Mars was once completely covered with water, yet refuse to believe there could have been a global flood on earth despite the fact that 70% of the surface is water and the fact that the transition zone we sit on top of is large enough to completely refill the world's oceans again. Got this off of a secular science website:
There’s as much water in Earth’s mantle as in all the oceans

(staff edit)

Why should we believe the flood event happened? Because, it is written... and Jesus repeated it. If that wasn't enough, legends of floods and an ark-like vessel exist in almost every culture. We must ask ourselves where we place our faith: In the word of God, or the word of man? I want to encourage you Dale that taking God at His word, even when unpopular in our fallen world, is not misplaced trust. As for the conventional wisdom of today, see what Matthew 24:35 has to say.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I don't think anyone supposes that Augustine was an "old earther." What the study of Augustine does reveal is that he did not take the same line on it as modern YECs. There is no hint in Augustine that belief in YECism is necessary for salvation, nor any justification for the hostility and even violence routinely meted out by YECs today to those Christians who don't "believe the Bible"--which why, I suspect, people like yourself "turn up your nose" at him. As for the Fathers, you have people like Clement, mentored by Peter and selected by him to be sucessor Bishop of Rome. What could he possibly know about Christian doctrine? Or Ignatius and Polycarp, students of John the Apostle himself? Might as well throw their writings right in the trash. Which is better, I suppose, than misrepresenting them like one poster (on this very board) who tried to convince me that the Apostolic Fathers secretly believe in Sola Scriptura even though they taught something else.

Hi speedwell,

Just a head's up. You need to direct this post to dale. I was responding to his post in which he was using Augustine to support that the Genesis account shouldn't be taken literally. As far as I know, he was using that reference to answer some of the statements I had made earlier as regards the creation event. None of the stuff that you bring up about why you believe that Augustine came up in this discussion isn't in keeping with what the chain of discussion has been about. Perhaps you should ask dale if he wrote his reference concerning Augustine to try and show me that Augustine didn't believe in a young earth. I could be mistaken, but I don't think his reference has anything to do with the flood and more specifically Noah's ark. Did Augustine write anything about the ark of the flood?

As far as I know, Augustine did believe the flood account to be a literal account.

Thank you.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
As far as we (ekklesia) know, all the ekklesia immersed in Yeshua's Name in the assemblies in the NEW TESTAMENT believed everything Yeshua told them about Noah and the Flood,
and everything else Yeshua told them as well - they did not pick and choose what to believe and what not to believe.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Speedwell

Well-Known Member
May 11, 2016
23,928
17,625
81
St Charles, IL
✟347,270.00
Country
United States
Faith
Other Religion
Marital Status
Married
Hi speedwell,

Just a head's up. You need to direct this post to dale. I was responding to his post in which he was using Augustine to support that the Genesis account shouldn't be taken literally. As far as I know, he was using that reference to answer some of the statements I had made earlier as regards the creation event. None of the stuff that you bring up about why you believe that Augustine came up in this discussion isn't in keeping with what the chain of discussion has been about. Perhaps you should ask dale if he wrote his reference concerning Augustine to try and show me that Augustine didn't believe in a young earth. I could be mistaken, but I don't think his reference has anything to do with the flood and more specifically Noah's ark. Did Augustine write anything about the ark of the flood?

As far as I know, Augustine did believe the flood account to be a literal account.

Thank you.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
I am not aware that Augustine wrote about the Flood or the ark, although I agree that he probably thought it was a real event. Whether he thought the Genesis story a "literal" account, rather than merely historical is by no means certain. Sorry to be off topic; I thought I was merely agreeing with you about Augustine not likely being an "old Earther" and musing about why so many creationists dismiss the Fathers.
 
Upvote 0

yeshuaslavejeff

simple truth, martyr, disciple of Yahshua
Jan 6, 2005
39,944
11,098
okie
✟214,996.00
Faith
Anabaptist
musing about why so many creationists dismiss the Fathers.
phooey, wrong section to reply to this.. ..... (I just checked what section this is in, and it's not the controversial one) ....
Watch and maybe see there why so many creationists dismiss the [so-called] ecf....
 
Upvote 0

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
I am not aware that Augustine wrote about the Flood or the ark, although I agree that he probably thought it was a real event. Whether he thought the Genesis story a "literal" account, rather than merely historical is by no means certain. Sorry to be off topic; I thought I was merely agreeing with you about Augustine not likely being an "old Earther" and musing about why so many creationists dismiss the Fathers.

Hi speedwell,

I'm not aware that he did either. However, you wrote, as did dale, that I turned up my nose at him. I don't know why you two would use that phrase. I don't turn my nose up at him, I just have no confidence that he necessarily wrote the truth. I'm sure he was a very smart man and like many who teach what they believe is the truth of the Scriptures, I fully imagine that he believed he knew the truth. Maybe he did. As you've written, there really isn't any solid evidence that Augustine believed in an old earth. He dic apparently believe that Adam was a real live person who lived only 6,000 years ago. If he understood the purpose of God, then I imagine that he did believe the creation to be only 6 days older than that, but we don't really have any solid evidence that he did or didn't.

What I do know is that the Scriptures, according to Paul were given to us as holy men of God were inspired by God's Holy Spirit. Jesus seemed to have full confidence in the old covenant Scriptures. The whole purpose, as I understand it, for the born again believer is to be more like Jesus. One with him as he is one with the Father. So, I want to believe as Jesus did. I want to strive to live as Jesus lived, although I will readily admit that in that, I fail often.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
 
Upvote 0

pat34lee

Messianic
Sep 13, 2011
11,293
2,637
59
Florida, USA
✟89,330.00
Faith
Messianic
Marital Status
Single
Citing the experience of the largest wooden ships ever built is not mocking Christianity.

Do you think that European shipbuilders just out of the dark ages had
skill to compare with anyone pre-flood, especially someone directed
by God? They, and those just after the flood are the ones who built
civilization and everything required for it.

The Chinese, on the other hand...
Zheng He's Huge Treasure Ships
 
Upvote 0

Adstar

Well-Known Member
May 10, 2005
2,184
1,382
New South Wales
✟49,258.00
Country
Australia
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
Adstar, what do you think of Exodus 19:4?
Then Moses went up to God, and the Lord called to him from the mountain and said, “This is what you are to say to the descendants of Jacob and what you are to tell the people of Israel: ‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.​


So do you think that if you don't interpret all scripture literally then you are not "trusting the Bible"? I don't think either of us take Ex 19:4 literally, yet if you don't, by your own approch, I might respond:

If you do not trust in the Bible accout, where God says that He flew the Jews out of Egypt with giant eagles, like in the Hobbit as said in Exodus then you do not trust in the Word of God and therefore you do not have faith in the Word of God.. This is plain facts.. I am not making anything up am i....

Well, do you trust the word of God or not?

In Christ-

Papias

Of course some of the scripture in the Bible is figurative.. I do not interpret all the Bible using literal interpretation..

But your quoted verse does not make the entire story of the Exodus Flood all figurative.. A plain reading of it shows it to be mostly Literal.. I do not totally reject the story of the Exodus and say it could never happen because it is impossible for God to cause the sea to part.. I trust that God did cause the sea to part.. I have Faith that God did cause that to happen..

So i trust in the Bible account that God brought the Hebrews literally out of Egypt and i accept that the term used in the verse you quoted as symbolic / figurative speech..
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

miamited

Ted
Site Supporter
Oct 4, 2010
13,243
6,313
Seneca SC
✟705,807.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Hi papias,

You wrote:
‘You yourselves have seen what I did to Egypt, and how I carried you on eagles’ wings and brought you to myself.

So, you believe that a simple turn of phrase is the same as: So God said to Noah, “I am going to put an end to all people, for the earth is filled with violence because of them. I am surely going to destroy both them and the earth.

Tell me please, what's the turn of phrase in that sentence?

And again:
So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be three hundred cubits long, fifty cubits wide and thirty cubits high. Make a roof for it, leaving below the roof an opening one cubithigh all around. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks. I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.

What's the turn of phrase found in this passage?

And again:
You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you.
Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them.”

What's the turn of phrase found in this passage?

And again:
The LORD then said to Noah, “Go into the ark, you and your whole family, because I have found you righteous in this generation. Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate, and also seven pairs of every kind of bird, male and female, to keep their various kinds alive throughout the earth. Seven days from now I will send rain on the earth for forty days and forty nights, and I will wipe from the face of the earth every living creature I have made.”

Can you point out the turn of phrase in this passage?

And again:
And Noah and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives entered the ark to escape the waters of the flood. Pairs of clean and unclean animals, of birds and of all creatures that move along the ground,
male and female, came to Noah and entered the ark, as God had commanded Noah. And after the seven days the floodwaters came on the earth. In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, on the seventeenth day of the second month—on that day all the springs of the great deep burst forth, and the floodgates of the heavens were opened.

Same question.

You see, I get that when God said that He had saved Israel from their oppression in Egypt that He had brought them to him on the wings of eagles, that this 3 word phrase was using a turn of phrase in which He wanted to impress upon the Israelites how He had saved them as if they had been flown out of Egypt as one might be saved on the wings of eagles. I honestly get that and then we know by the actual account of God's saving Israel that it wasn't actually by sending an eagle into the midst of Egypt and having everyone jump on and he flew them out of Egypt on this, what must have been, huge and powerful eagle. After all, we know that there were at least several thousand people involved here. That would require a pretty big eagle.

However, most people understand that the 3 word phrase is what's called a turn of phrase or, what one might say, a simile. But in the flood account, we have the same thing as we find in the actual account of God's saving Israel from Egypt. It explains, in quite detail, how Noah built an ark and then filled it with all kinds of animals and then Noah's family and the floodwaters came and lifted the ark above the flood waters. The account is several paragraphs long, although yes, I understand that the original Hebrew likely wasn't broken into paragraphs as we see today, but nevertheless, it was a lot longer and more detailed than a simple turn of phrase. Just as the full account of God's saving Israel from their Egyptian oppressors tells us how He caused 10 plagues to befall Egypt. Then He commanded them to be ready to leave Egypt and to ask the Egyptians for their valuables and then had them go out into the wilderness and parted a sea for them. All so that they could be rescued from Egypt.

Later in reminding the Egyptians of the reality of what He had actually done to save them, He said to them that He had brought them out on 'wings of eagles'. It honestly baffles me that anyone would see that God's later saying to Israel that He had saved them on 'wings of eagles' as a reminder to them of what He had done is 'proof' that the whole account of how exactly God saved Israel from both Egypt and Noah's family from the flood is all just a really, really, really, really long turn of phrase.

There are, according to Jesus, none so blind as those who will not see.

God bless you,
In Christ, ted
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: NobleMouse
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Is there that much wood in the Middle East?
There was plenty of Cedar trees in Lebanon.

Ezekiel 31:8b
No tree in God's own garden was so beautiful.
9 I made it beautiful, with spreading branches.
It was the envy of every tree in Eden, the garden of God.
 
Upvote 0

Dale

Senior Veteran
Site Supporter
Apr 14, 2003
7,178
1,226
71
Sebring, FL
✟664,282.00
Faith
Protestant
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Democrat
There was plenty of Cedar trees in Lebanon.

Ezekiel 31:8b
No tree in God's own garden was so beautiful.
9 I made it beautiful, with spreading branches.
It was the envy of every tree in Eden, the garden of God.


The tree in Ezekiel 31 stands for the nation of Assyria. It is symbolic, it isn't a literal tree.

Were there plenty of cedars in Lebanon? Cedar wood was highly prized and desirable for many uses. Supply is another problem entirely.

The cedars of Lebanon grow primarily on mountains, on north and west facing slopes, at an elevation of 4300 and 9800 feet. Only a fraction of the land in Lebanon is mountainous and only a portion of the mountain land at the right elevation. Cedars also require lots of sunlight.




Link:
Cedrus libani - Wikipedia
 
Upvote 0

joshua 1 9

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
May 11, 2015
17,420
3,592
Northern Ohio
✟314,577.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Were there plenty of cedars in Lebanon?
Yes, Solomon used them to build his house and the temple of God. The forests are gone but a few trees remain so we can see what they look like.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums