Noahs Ark

[sandy whitelinger]

Those people are stupid enough to let the bible dictate their reasoning.

Jesus loves you. The rest of us might think you are rude.

Those people should be smart enough to know the world doesn't have the structural capacity to hold that much water.

Please explain that one.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Maybe the first Chinese brother swallowed it all.

Politically incorect.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

And the sea creatures didn't die because of the flood, they died because of sin.

Animals don't sin.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Apparently, some say that stories, such as Noah's ark are not to be taken literally. Of course, if the events didn't really happen, then I don't really understand what's to be learned by stories, since they don't represent anything that actually happened.

So sad.

Precisely.

 

[painted wolf]

Animals don't sin.

not even the gay ones...

wa:do

 

[sandy whitelinger]

not even the gay ones...

wa:do

Not even the alcholic ones.:no:

 

[painted wolf]

So why were they wiped out too? surely god could have smote all the humans and left the animals alone?

wa:do

 

[sandy whitelinger]

So why were they wiped out too? surely god could have smote all the humans and left the animals alone?

wa:do

That would have been a very tricky flood.

 

[Willamena]

Politically incorect.

Not actually, just a continuation of the mythic theme.

 

[painted wolf]

That would have been a very tricky flood.

Why a flood... he has famine, plague, death to all the firstborns... a host of other tricks up his sleeve.... why something as wontonly destructive as a flood?

wa:do

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Why a flood... he has famine, plague, death to all the firstborns... a host of other tricks up his sleeve.... why something as wontonly destructive as a flood?

wa:do

Evidently God cared for the symbolism of a flood, the destruction and the salvation offered by one event.

 

[painted wolf]

Well, as I see the story as symbolic... I guess I can agree with that.

wa:do

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Well, as I see the story as symbolic... I guess I can agree with that.

wa:do

Since the flood story pointed to Christ and salvation, it would seem that Gos wished to emphasize that the same thing, Christ, is responsible for your salvation or condemnation. The waters of the flood presented the same scenario. this does not make the flood only allogorical.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

Since the flood story pointed to Christ and salvation, it would seem that Gos wished to emphasize that the same thing, Christ, is responsible for your salvation or condemnation. The waters of the flood presented the same scenario. this does not make the flood only allogorical.

The flood story does no such thing.

The imagery was used in the New Testament, but that doesn't mean that anyone had Christ in mind when Genesis was first written.

 

[RomCat]

There were no brontosaurus. They
disappeared millions of years ago.
The Ark was a huge vessel that could
contain every existing species of animal
life.
There were stalls that kept certain species
from mixing with other species.

 

[painted wolf]

Do you realize how many living species of animals there are?
Modern zoo's can't hold them all... how could they fit on a boat?

wa:do

 

[darkendless]

There were no brontosaurus. They
disappeared millions of years ago.
The Ark was a huge vessel that could
contain every existing species of animal
life.
There were stalls that kept certain species
from mixing with other species.

Given the age of the Ark there is no chance that the materials used to build it could hold together. Such a huge vessel made of wood (likely Young's Modulus of 15 GPa max.) would more than likely crack under such huge pressures caused by its own weight and gravity. Basically, the weight force of the boat itself would be enough for it to crush itself. With all the debree on earth floating about in the water, mountain tops being submerged, the chances of the ark not being destroyed (assuming it could even float) are none to rediculously none.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

Politically incorect.

Reference to a children's story which had a character who could swallow the ocean is politically incorrect? Try to make some sense.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

The flood story does no such thing.

The imagery was used in the New Testament, but that doesn't mean that anyone had Christ in mind when Genesis was first written.

That's why I believe in the divine inspiration of Scripture...God had it in mind.

 

[Kilgore Trout]

That would have been a very tricky flood.

Not for a god.