The story of Noah's Ark, or whatever floats your boat.

[Par5]

How many people believe the story of Nah's Ark, as recorded in the bible, is an actual historical event.
It's a story that children enjoy if the number of toy arks sold down through the years is anything to go by. But what about the grown ups, do they really believe it actually happened exactly as the bible says?

 

[jacks]

But what about the grown ups, do they really believe it actually happened exactly as the bible says?

Let me answer for everyone...some do, some don't, and some aren't sure.

 

[Sabertooth]

How many people believe the story of Nah's Ark, as recorded in the bible, is an actual historical event. [sic]

Since this is an apologetics sub-forum, are you hoping that someone can prove it to your satisfaction?

(Jesus treated Noah's Ark as a literal event in Matthew 24:37-39 & Luke 17:26-27.)

 

[Kenny'sID]

*exitedly raises hand wiggling around in chair, shouting, IDO! I DO!

And said, Verily I say unto you, Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.

I think children like it because they know it is true. For me, no reason not to believe it is true.

 

[Hazelelponi]

How many people believe the story of Nah's Ark, as recorded in the bible, is an actual historical event.
It's a story that children enjoy if the number of toy arks sold down through the years is anything to go by. But what about the grown ups, do they really believe it actually happened exactly as the bible says?

I believe the Biblical account, but I also see the flood as being a bit more localized than what we now see as the "world"

The world, to Noah, was the general area he lived in and all he knew and knew of.

We know the sea levels rose such that, that alone would have been traumatic, (and we see many flood stories from native people's and tribes as well likely due to sea level rise) if you add in rain storms to the mix and yes, I absolutely believe the Biblical account is not only possible, but real.

 

[Monksailor]

I do! I do! I do! My hand is up and waving!!! Now, sock it to me baby; let it all hang out! Go for it dude!

 

[JohnClay]

A related thread:
Was the Flood global?

About toy arks:
According to the Bible the ark was 134 metres long or 440 feet long while compared to the animals the toys are tiny....

On the topic of kids, the story can be used to "teach" kids about why there are rainbows....

BTW a life-size model of the ark has been built in the US as a tourist attraction showing that many people believe it was historical...

Life-size Noah’s Ark

 

[disciple Clint]

How many people believe the story of Nah's Ark, as recorded in the bible, is an actual historical event.
It's a story that children enjoy if the number of toy arks sold down through the years is anything to go by. But what about the grown ups, do they really believe it actually happened exactly as the bible says?

Hugh of St. Victor: Noah’s Ark as an Allegory for Contemplation

 

[Par5]

Since this is an apologetics sub-forum, are you hoping that someone can prove it to your satisfaction?

(Jesus treated Noah's Ark as a literal event in Matthew 24:37-39 & Luke 17:26-27.)

I am not expecting anyone to prove the Noah's Ark story any more than I would expect someone to prove that the Lord of the Rings is a factual story. They are both great stories but each is totally divorced from reality.
No, I am just curious to see if in the 21st century some people actually believe the story word for word. A story that is full of absurdities, absurdities being part and parcel of all good fantasy tales.
I am also interested to find out from those who believe the story, why they believe it, and how they think such an event was possible when you consider that from start to finish such an enterprise would be a logistical nightmare.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

How many people believe the story of Nah's Ark, as recorded in the bible, is an actual historical event.
It's a story that children enjoy if the number of toy arks sold down through the years is anything to go by. But what about the grown ups, do they really believe it actually happened exactly as the bible says?

Geology in many ways refutes the flood story. Just one example is a conglomerate rock formation. It is a rock created from many different rocks and requires many cycles of erosion, deposition and burial to form. This is incompatible with the flood story. So not only do we have no good evidence that the flood story is true, we have good evidence that it could not have happened from geology as just one science that refutes the story.

 

[Par5]

Geology in many ways refutes the flood story. Just one example is a conglomerate rock formation. It is a rock created from many different rocks and requires many cycles of erosion, deposition and burial to form. This is incompatible with the flood story. So not only do we have no good evidence that the flood story is true, we have good evidence that it could not have happened from geology as just one science that refutes the story.

Science does indeed refute a worldwide flood, but I am more interested in understanding from the believers their thoughts on the more practical side of managing a vessel full of creatures from all parts of the world.
How do they imagine eight people managed to feed all those animals?
What about animals with very specialized diets?
How was the animal fooder kept fresh?
What about ventilation, as there was only one window?
Disposal of animal waste.
Those are only a few of the many many problems the crew of the ark would have to overcome.
The animal husbandry problem would have been one that would bring a modern zoo, skilled in animal husbandry, to its knees.
So I am not asking for proof of Noah's Ark, just how believers think Noah and his family were able to succeed in dealing with such a mammoth undertaking.

 

[Clizby WampusCat]

So I am not asking for proof of Noah's Ark, just how believers think Noah and his family were able to succeed in dealing with such a mammoth undertaking.

When I was a believer I just chalked it up to a miracle of god. I guess they can also just say that the scientific evidence that refutes a flood was planted by god although that would mean god planted evidence to deceive us.

 

[cvanwey]

Science does indeed refute a worldwide flood, but I am more interested in understanding from the believers their thoughts on the more practical side of managing a vessel full of creatures from all parts of the world.
How do they imagine eight people managed to feed all those animals?
What about animals with very specialized diets?
How was the animal fooder kept fresh?
What about ventilation, as there was only one window?
Disposal of animal waste.
Those are only a few of the many many problems the crew of the ark would have to overcome.
The animal husbandry problem would have been one that would bring a modern zoo, skilled in animal husbandry, to its knees.
So I am not asking for proof of Noah's Ark, just how believers think Noah and his family were able to succeed in dealing with such a mammoth undertaking.

I've dealt with these questions in the past. FYI, the answers I often received are as follows:

How do they imagine eight people managed to feed all those animals?
What about animals with very specialized diets? God only took two of 'each kind'. Hence, there were many less animals, back then, verse what you might think.

How was the animal fooder kept fresh? They were all vegetarians, until after the flood. Their diet was completely different. Maybe they only brought non-perishable food?
What about ventilation, as there was only one window? Their oxygen was not completely cut off, they could still breath.
Disposal of animal waste. A combination of hibernation and fewer animals then we might think, due to taking only two of each 'kind'.

Another question, for which I also have yet to receive a satisfactory response --- to add to the running list...

Which of the 8 were responsible for continuing to carry over all the existing STD's?

 

[cvanwey]

When I was a believer I just chalked it up to a miracle of god. I guess they can also just say that the scientific evidence that refutes a flood was planted by god although that would mean god planted evidence to deceive us.

I think ultimately, you'll get this...

"The Bible does not go into details. All we know is that it happened."

And then some might try to redirect or steer your attention away from the obvious, to instead state something to the affect of...

"You are missing the moral of the story."

 

[Sabertooth]

I am not expecting anyone to prove the Noah's Ark story any more than I would expect someone to prove that the Lord of the Rings is a factual story. They are both great stories but each is totally divorced from reality.

Then why would you post this in the Apologetics sub-forum, which has the sole purpose of offering a Biblical defense for the tenets of Theology?

 

[Tinker Grey]

Then why would you post this in the Apologetics sub-forum, which has the sole purpose of offering a Biblical defense for the tenets of Theology?

To find out what the defense of the idea of Noah's Ark is?

 

[Sabertooth]

To find out what the defense of the idea of Noah's Ark is?

That Jesus treated it as literal is my best defense. (I am not too concerned how convincing that is, because God requires more than a change of mind.)

 

[Tinker Grey]

That Jesus treated it as literal is my best defense. (I am not too concerned how convincing that is, because God requires more than a change of mind.)

It's not very convincing. I can refer to Huck Finn to make a point without requiring the listener to believe the literalness of a rafting trip.

 

[Sabertooth]

I can refer to Huck Finn to make a point without requiring the listener to believe the literalness of a rafting trip.

This sub-forum is for Christian Apologetics, not Atheism Apologetics (which has different ground rules). We consider Matthew-Acts to be historical narratives, not works of fiction.

 

[Tinker Grey]

This sub-forum is for Christian Apologetics, not Atheism Apologetics (which has different ground rules). We consider Matthew-Acts to be historical narratives, not works of fiction.

I wasn't denigrating your position. It is a position and I appreciate you answering the question. But you could consider my response as further challenge for Christians to respond to (do apologetics).

Also, one can consider Jesus' remarks to have been made without assuming that his remarks themselves were meant to be taken literally even if he literally said them. After all, the parables aren't generally considered to be taken as historical (although, I have run across the rare believer who thinks they were.)