Noah and the Ark

[NotforSale]

Originally Posted by Aquila

When it comes to Noah and the ark I firmly believe in a literal global flood. I believe that nearly 7000 species of land animals could fit on the ark (Halley’s Bible Commentary). I believe that the animals that were loaded onto the ark were led to the ark by the hand of God. This would require geography somewhat different than what we see today. There would be a necessity for “land bridges” linking the major land masses on earth. I believe that the “windows of heaven” and that the “fountains of the deep” were opened. I believe that this was the most catastrophic event our world as seen in its existence. When the entire world was covered with water for nearly 370 days excessive amounts of this flood water was frozen in the Polar Regions. When the flood subsided 150 days later most of this frozen water remained frozen in the Polar Regions. With excessive amounts of water frozen in the Polar Regions after the flood subsided sea level was significantly lower than it is today. I believe that many “land bridges” were present linking most of the major land masses on earth. As animals multiplied and migrated with the stabilizing climate they were able to migrate to more distant parts of the earth via these “land bridges”. Some human beings migrated on exploratory expeditions also. However, the majority of mankind remained in one place, eventually settling in Shinar. For the next 101 years after the flood the climate on earth was still stabilizing from the flood. The flood waters frozen in the Polar Regions (as glaciers) were melting causing sea levels to slowly rise globally. As sea levels rose slowly each “land bridge” vanished, one by one. After 101 years the last “land bridge” linking major land masses (continents) was covered by rising sea water. Perhaps this was the Bearing Straight. I believe that this event was very significant for early humanity because now mankind was cut off from being able to reach the most distant places on earth. I believe we read about this in Genesis,

Genesis 10:25a
“And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one [was] Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided;”

It’s very possible that the earth is still stabilizing from the flood and this is why as ice caps fluctuate science is discovering a general retreating of the ice caps leading them to the conclusions that propose global warming. All of this would mean that our world is covered with more water today than prior to the flood. The implication is that the flood waters are still upon the earth defining coastlines as we know them today.

As far as the seas go, I believe that prior to the flood salinity in the oceans wasn’t as extreme as it is today. I believe that the flood most likely claimed most of the animals living in the seas. However, enough of the species that we see today survived. I believe that after the flood salinity levels in the oceans was greater and that sea life adapted or migrated as necessary to the various depths and regions were they could live comfortably. Life always finds a way.

I believe that the effects of this most devastating event and the geological remains left in its wake are very difficult to understand (and are definitely misunderstood by evolutionary science), especially since we’ve never witnessed such a globally devastating event. When evolutionists review the data they come at said data from the presupposition that there isn’t a God and that the earth has been “evolving” naturally over billions of years. Through this presupposition they interpret the data. Creationists come at the data from the presupposition that there is a God and that the Bible is God’s Word regarding how he created the earth and the events that transpired afterwards (including the flood).

At the end of the day the question is simply this… Whose report will you believe?

I believe that while we might not understand it today, someday during Christ’s reign we’ll learn how the Bible was right after all and how misguided evolutionary science truly is today. If we compromise for evolutionary science we'll be left looking pretty stupid when we stand before Jesus.

Chris, I understand your approach and feelings about this catastrophic event that stumps pure science. I wouldn't be truthful if I told you I have felt the same way in the past. But as life has unfolded many unexpected things, and experience has become the great teacher it has, my views have changed entirely about dramatized and extreme stories that fail the test of being proven. I’ve just seen too many broken promises and let downs in modern Church Culture.

The one thing you'll notice in your post, it is full of assumptions; your ideas. What you feel, regardless of the facts. I have been so guilty of this in the past, and my “God Said” ideas are now coming back to haunt me. Speaking of yesterdays or the days to come must not only be done with caution, it must be done with great care and research, otherwise we set ourselves up for scrutiny that can destroy our reputation. I’ve watched so many people over the years say things, especially in the realm of Prophecy that brought total discredit to the person. It’s real easy to say or believe in things that can't be proven. With no guage, endless presumption can flow.

When we "Stage" past events upon what we believe or presume, disregarding the Facts, we insult the Creator of our Universe by believing in Myths that have been proven to be false. We also cancer the clear understanding that God is very much in touch with us through the things which He has made for us to observe with our human bodies. The more we build on Faith based assumptions, the further away God becomes, allowing Religion her march forward to manipulate the ignorant, leaving the door wide open to make up whatever we want.

It is more than evident, we see through History where the Church has had to "Adjust" its opinions because "We now know". To continue our quest for Truth, embracing something that clearly defies sound logic and principle also corrupts the basis for morals. Right and Wrong are less defined because conceptual intelligence forms in the womb of "Maybe".

It's no wonder that people can't decide if they're saved or not. Trying to figure out who's right and wrong on the subject is buried beneath a billion debates, with still no solid answer. And this is what has led me to give people answers that can be measured rather than assumed.

I tell people about love by measuring my own experience of love. I tell people about patience by my own experience of being patient. I tell people about suffering by my own experience of suffering. I find that if we can clearly point people in a direction by actual events that can be validated, the distance between God and Man is removed. In other words, the Bible never says that the Prodigal son’s father ever went to look for him, but experiences of my own say he did. This severs concepts easily born that make God a distant and unloving Maker, bringing the Lord directly into where we live.

I’ve come to learn that we extract Truth from the Bible by our lives (Reality), and if we’re honest, we can see God’s Face in the midst of a million voices that say otherwise. What better place to understand the Creator, than to learn of His Creation. The song of birds, the distant sunset, and the power of love between mankind can breathe into us the very Truth that is spoken about in the Scripture.

Original Manuscripts are nowhere to be found. Only copies exist, leaving great room for Religions ploy to taint what does remain, giving us our current Translations that reek with Religious pitch and clamor. We are at the mercy of this Book that we are told, “Never to question”, leaving us to believe the entire content is Sacred. Even if we are to find flaw and error, there are those who stand and cry, “Rebellion! Evil! Off with their heads!”

If the story of Noah is found flawed by science and the facts, then maybe there is something else there for us to learn. I don't believe God is displeased with those who are truly searching past the Traditions or Stories that the Church demands us to believe in. Why do I know this? Because I'm a father who listened to my children when they came to me with their confusion, only wanting a strait answer.

[Esther]

Originally Posted by pelathais

I'm not saying, "Challenge the Bible..." I'm saying, "Challenge yourself!"

The earth is clearly far, far, far more than 6,000 years old and all of the continents were not covered by a flood 4,000 years ago. Challenge yourself to come to terms with that.

And when you do, I am more than confident that the Bible will still be standing true.

What do you base this assumption on? Man made dating techniques?

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Esther

What do you base this assumption on? Man made dating techniques?

My guess is yes.....right along with those man-made cars, man-made airplanes, and man-made space shuttles.

[RandyWayne]

Originally Posted by Esther

What do you base this assumption on? Man made dating techniques?

Not "man made" dating techniques, but dating techniques that already existed that man has learned to utilize.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by pelathais

How about this...

Why doesn't one of the multi-billionaire TV evangelists simply build an exact replica of Noah's Ark?

Why? Because it simply can't be done.

http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/woodmorappe-review.html

Some folks have tried: http://www.godsark.org/Our_Ministry_Home.html
(see attached photo).

The building code enforcement folks won't allow a wooden structure to be built that has spans greater than 300 feet unless the whole thing is reinforced with a heavy steel I-beam frame work and reinforced concrete piering and caissons. You see all of that in the attached photo.

A literal interpretation of Genesis 6 leads us to believe that Noah's Ark was a free standing building for 120 years before the flood. Why can't anyone build such a building today?

The longest wooden ships ever built were the 9 masted schooners of a little over 100 years ago. These vessels approached the 300 foot limit for wooden structures and required steam driven pumps to pump out the water that continually flowed through the gaps in the planking. They were also restricted to inland routes and were never allowed to go into the open sea.

Wood is simply too flexible a material for such large ships and structures. You need a rigid material like steel for those large spans.

Of course, it would be easy to prove me wrong... if I was wrong. But nobody can. Nobody.

There simply was never a real vessel such as "Noah's Ark." Those who demand a literal reading of Genesis 1 through Genesis 11, do the inspired Bible a tremendous disservice and actually advance the cause of atheism.

I'm just guessing here but
1)I'm guessing that Genesis doesn't contain the exact detailed instructions of how to build the Ark, but gives us a general description.
2)I'm guessing that if God specifically told Noah how to build it, it would work for the purpose He planned it
3)I'm guessing that if God didn't want it to sink, it wouldn't sink if it had wide open gaping holes in it.

Basically I don't see how any Christian can say the flood story is just allegorical. The Bible doesn't present it as an allegory, but as something that actually happened. Jesus refers to it in Matthew 24, and Peter does in 1 Peter.

Frankly, the God who created all things, who created the universe, the stars, the oceans, and is present even to the depths of those oceans, is more than able to simply keep a boat afloat some water, and make all situations work out according to his purpose, whether or not there are still I beams and concrete.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Did a man literally go down from Jerusalem to Jericho and fall among thieves? Was this same man's plight subsequently ignored by both a priest and then a Levite, each in turn? Was this same man then literally rescued by a "Good Samaritan?"

What was the Samaritan even doing on a road between two "clean" Jewish cities? The priests and Levites would take this route to deliberately avoid traveling through "unclean" Samaria, but why would a Samaritan avoid Samaria?

Do you even take this story literally? Why not? It doesn't really say that it's a "parable" anywhere.

Did "Lazarus" literally find himself within Abraham's literal bosom? The list goes on. Why not just accept the Bible on its own terms?

Pel the things you presented, the Bible presents AS PARABLES. The things were discussing the Bible presents AS EVENTS, big difference.

Did the walls of Jereicho literally fall down when some people shouted?

Did lots wife really turn into a pillar?

Did God really destroy Sodom & Ghommorah with fire?

Did Moses really recieve the 10 commandments written by God himself?

Did the sun really stand still in the sky?

Did David really kill a lion and a bear with his bare hands?

Did Samason really defeat 3000 phillistines?

Why stop in the old testament, once you doubt something?

Did a VIRGIN really have a baby?

Did a dead man really get up out of his grave?

Did people really come out of the graves at Jesus crucifiction?

There are some things in the Bible hard for me to fathom, but I've seen the miraculous in my life, and I have no reason to doubt seeing how the Bible has worked in my life. I haven't seen a blind man see, and I haven't seen a dead man get up, but I have seen demons cast out, and miraculous healings.

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by Aquila

Here are some thougts of mine....

I've typically favored the Day Age theory with a local flood. However, I've come to the conclusion that one either believes the Bible... or they don't. Was Jesus born of a virgin? Did Jesus turn water into wine? Did Jesus walk on water? Did Jesus heal the blind, lame, and deaf? Did Jesus raise the dead? Did Jesus rebuke evil spirits? Did Jesus feed 5,000 with two fishes and five loaves of bread? Did Jesus rise from the dead on the third day? Is Jesus alive today? Will Jesus return to judge the quick and the dead? What is one to believe? Either one believes these things or they don't.

All of these are "miracles" regarding Jesus are things that defy any scientific understanding. All include processes and powers that are beyond the scope of science. You have folks that believe every miracle of Jesus but then for some reason they can't believe in a literal six day creation or a global flood. They argue that there isn't enough water on the planet. They argue measurements as you did. They pick at how the animals would have survived in the ark. We're dealing with a supernatural God. The same God who instantly turned water into wine and walked on water when manifest in the flesh managed the flood and all the provision of the ark. If we can believe that Jesus did these things and was raised from the dead... why can't we believe in the creation and global flood?

I'll tell you...

We all have interests. Many find science facinating and the hunt for fresh data and information is exciting. I'm a big National Geographic fan and I love reading about dinosaurs. For this reason I harmonized my faith with my interests via the Day-Age theory. Other folks do this with other interests. Those of alternative lifestyles read the Bible in a way that allows for their lifestyle. Those who are facinated with the apacolyptic choose Post-Tribulationism. Those facinated with history and the notion that Scripture is validated through fulfilled prophecy embrace Preterism. We all choose to put our faith in Scripture and read it the way it suits us. Maybe on some pereferal subjects that's alright. But when it comes to serious subjects we need to stick to Scripture and what it actually says... even if it embarrasses or confounds us.


Today I look at it a bit differently... I either believe the Bible or I don't. If I can't believe in a supernatural six day creation I certaintly can't believe that Jesus rose from the dead or performed the miracles he's recorded as having performed. The scientific community is in constant flux as more data is revealed. It's shifting sand. The Bible isn't. So I accept it as written. I know there are things in this book that blow my mind... but I have chosen to believe. I don't need evidence, don't care for it, nor do I think evidence to the contrary regarding Scripture is worth reviewing.

Being a Christian is much like being a mystic. We believe in things that transcend logic and science. We embrace it. We smile believing that no matter how the deception may fly, in the fulness of time the truth will be revealed and the Bible will stand as the truth. So I abandoned the Old Earth creation theories.... and I embraced the Bible as written. A literal six day creation with a global flood. Is it hard to believe? YES. But that's where faith comes in. I stand on the Word of God through faith not based on evidence.

I don't know... just a few random thoughts.

Awesome post, Bro. Chris.

I regret that I only can make it through page 11 of this thread, but I'm giving up for tonight, and hitting the sack.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Esther

What do you base this assumption on? Man made dating techniques?

LOL. Man can no more make nor alter the rate of nuclear decay than he can make a star like the sun.

How do you respond to those who say that YOUR method of dating the earth is clearly man-made? You have given up on all hopes of trying to support the inspiration of the Bible - so what's to say that it's not "man made?"

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

I'm just guessing here but
1)I'm guessing that Genesis doesn't contain the exact detailed instructions of how to build the Ark, but gives us a general description.
2)I'm guessing that if God specifically told Noah how to build it, it would work for the purpose He planned it
3)I'm guessing that if God didn't want it to sink, it wouldn't sink if it had wide open gaping holes in it.

It clearly states that the ark was 450 feet in length. Why has NO ONE ever tried to build an all wooden structure 450 feet in length? Why is it, in fact, illegal to do so?

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Basically I don't see how any Christian can say the flood story is just allegorical. The Bible doesn't present it as an allegory, but as something that actually happened. Jesus refers to it in Matthew 24, and Peter does in 1 Peter.

They are referring to literature that everyone was already familiar with. Even in that day there were disputes as to whether the story of the Flood was supposed to be understood as literal or not. The Talmud records debates on the subject going back long before Jesus Christ.

For whatever reasons, neither Jesus nor Peter take a position on that debate. Instead they go for the truths that are in the story and bring those things out. "God is longsuffering and patient... yet when it's time for judgment, judgment will come..."

It is your own mindset that causes you to read those passages as "proof." Read them again without the prejudice.

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Frankly, the God who created all things, who created the universe, the stars, the oceans, and is present even to the depths of those oceans, is more than able to simply keep a boat afloat some water, and make all situations work out according to his purpose, whether or not there are still I beams and concrete.

AGAIN (and again!) - I's not a question of "WHAT CAN GOD DO...???"

It's a question of "WHAT DID GOD DO...???"

What really happened? What does the evidence show?

Nobody saw O.J. Simpson kill those people. The only possible "eyewitness" was O.J. himself and he said he didn't do it.

Yet, what conclusions do you reach about that case - based upon the evidence?

We rely upon evidence for helping us to formulate all sorts of very important views about the world. Why is there no evidence for a global flood in the geologic record? Why hasn't anyone even tried to make a case for it?

Instead there's just been some "Well, I BELIEVE..." type statements and a couple of taunts. If this was some sort of BIBLE DOCTRINE surely there would have been something brought forward by now... but nothing.

There simply is no evidence whatsoever that the continents were covered by a global flood some 4,000 years ago.

None.

So why try to drown the Bible and its message in those waters?

[Esther]

Originally Posted by pelathais

LOL. Man can no more make nor alter the rate of nuclear decay than he can make a star like the sun.

How do you respond to those who say that YOUR method of dating the earth is clearly man-made? You have given up on all hopes of trying to support the inspiration of the Bible - so what's to say that it's not "man made?"

I haven't given up on supporting the inspiration of the Bible. I believe it as written.

And I agree man can not alter the rate of decay, however, I don't think men has the capability to acturately determine the age of anything.

I know years ago a scientist gave an old looking item to be tested and came back as being hundreds of years old when he knew in fact that it was less than 50 years old.

How can man possibly know the age of the earth when he was not here and can not guarantee his testing system for determining age is reliable?