Question about Noah's ark

[Enoch07]

Story says the peaks were covered. There is no place on earth no matter how humid where fog lasts for weeks without breaking, consistent in mornings sure but not all day and especially not during winds. That's not how fog works
Fog is low laying, hence fog. Neither corvids nor doves would have trouble flying over it. Especially since lack of thermals makes small migratory birds fly higher over water anyway.

But it's moot, the story doesn't hold water (n.a. dum tiss) on its face.

Lake effect fog look it up. It's not like normal fog. It is constantly being created by the large body of water. It's a possibility realistically you are just ignoring it

The story says the peaks were covered because that was Noah's perspective. He thought they were covered, obviously they were not.

The story is very believable when understood from a different perspective. But so long as you are stuck on it being a global flood you can't move forward.

 

[Enoch07]

The story is obviously describing the ark being moored on the peak which is still submerged, not that the ground around it was free of water. And the winds happened just after the rain and lasted for weeks, mountain would be immediately visible in a local flood. But the bible isn' describing a local flood, it' describing a myth whereby it's possible for the Ararat mountains to be completely covered. An implausible myth whose function to Jews (And everyone but a minority of American christians) is not a historical event but a moral tale.

And that's all there's left to say.

It's only implausible to ones who hold the fallacy of it being a global flood.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

It's only implausible to ones who hold the fallacy of it being a global flood.

It is describing a flood if taken literally would be global. Making it a local flood still doesn't make sense narritively and the attempts to do so merely reflect Christian apologetics. Believing for the need to believe, not because of compelling reason.

But you cling to your mytholgical timeline, the rest of us are moving on.

 

[Enoch07]

It is describing a flood if taken literally would be global. Making it a local flood still doesn't make sense narritively and the attempts to do so merely reflect Christian apologetics.

Why not?

Obviously the flood being a literal flood doesn't make it a global flood. Or else I would be making the global flood argument. A localized flood fits the narrative perfectly.

God needed to rid the Earth of Nephilim. Which was a very small population in a very specific region of the world. He did so with a localized devastating flood. Makes perfect sense.

 

[Grandliseur]

Just how powerful is a god if he were so easily and repeatedly hindered?... Is Satan so powerful that he is able to shape reality to his whim?

I can see that you are at point zero where it comes to the Bible. I am not interested in taking you through a 20 year course on this. Some questions are OK, but a big involvement is not what I want to get into.
------------
I am going to answer this question, and then I'll look at the post and see what else I might take a swing at.
To answer this question, we begin in the garden of Eden.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil had little to do with knowledge. The point about it was the right of man to determine for himself what was good and evil. It was about obedience and rulership. Did Adam recognize the need to obey God in all things, or did he think that he could determine for himself (self rule) what was good for him and what was evil. In other words, did Adam want to obey God's theocracy.

When the being that became satan (meaning: adversary 'to God obviously') rebelled against God and got A&E to disobey, they chose his rule, do what you want rule. Satan never challenged the power of God. He challenged the right of God to rule man, the need of God to rule man. Since this was a question not of power, but of legalities, of what is just and right, the issue was a legal heavenly one.

In legal issues, you don't go blasting your opponent to pieces in a physical war, you go to court. In such a court evidence is presented and after the court is adjourned, a judgment is handed down. Since satan never challenged God's power, but only his legal right to rule man who was in God's image, God did not kill him. Instead, time was allotted to solve the court challenge.

For this reason, satan was also allowed what he needed to prove his point in this challenge to God. This is why he is called the ruler of this world. He is being permitted the time to prove that his rule, the rule of mankind according to their likes and dislikes, the personal choosing of what is good and evil, is going to benefit mankind, or not.

The issue has only been put to rest in our times of high tech. Even with our modern science, we are driving the earth into destruction, destroying the habitats and ecosystems, threatening to destroy all things with atomic warfare, with pollution, etc. And, we surely have proven ourselves incapable of handling our social problems, of assisting places, nations, on earth that suffer from famine, etc.

Since the legal issue is coming to its conclusion, the end of our world, not earth, is approaching. All national governments shall be erased and shall be replaced with God's theocracy with Christ as ruler.
------
Thus about satan's power we read that he is the ruler of this world, that he has the power to cause death. He will gather all the nations in a final attempt of killing everyone on earth since he knows it is soon time for himself to die. It is the old style, 'if I can't have it, neither shall anyone else' philosophy. As you can see, the nations are getting ready for war, the doomsday clock is approaching 12 more than at any other time. As scripture says:
Revelation 11:17-18 . . .God, the Almighty, the One who is and who was, because you have taken your great power and begun ruling as king. 18 But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”

At no other time in mankind's history have we been bringing the earth to destruction, but we are now. Those who do so shall be erased, destroyed.​

Uhhhh... Where is advanced technology and your reasoning for it's destruction found in the bible? You seem to have a penchant for conspiracy theories...

Please look beyond the first 30 seconds.

Basic info about advanced technology: Link:

​

 

[JoshuaTree]

I can see that you are at point zero where it comes to the Bible. I am not interested in taking you through a 20 year course on this. Some questions are OK, but a big involvement is not what I want to get into.
------------
I am going to answer this question, and then I'll look at the post and see what else I might take a swing at.
To answer this question, we begin in the garden of Eden.

The tree of knowledge of good and evil had little to do with knowledge. The point about it was the right of man to determine for himself what was good and evil. It was about obedience and rulership. Did Adam recognize the need to obey God in all things, or did he think that he could determine for himself (self rule) what was good for him and what was evil. In other words, did Adam want to obey God's theocracy.

When the being that became satan (meaning: adversary 'to God obviously') rebelled against God and got A&E to disobey, they chose his rule, do what you want rule. Satan never challenged the power of God. He challenged the right of God to rule man, the need of God to rule man. Since this was a question not of power, but of legalities, of what is just and right, the issue was a legal heavenly one.

In legal issues, you don't go blasting your opponent to pieces in a physical war, you go to court. In such a court evidence is presented and after the court is adjourned, a judgment is handed down. Since satan never challenged God's power, but only his legal right to rule man who was in God's image, God did not kill him. Instead, time was allotted to solve the court challenge.

For this reason, satan was also allowed what he needed to prove his point in this challenge to God. This is why he is called the ruler of this world. He is being permitted the time to prove that his rule, the rule of mankind according to their likes and dislikes, the personal choosing of what is good and evil, is going to benefit mankind, or not.

The issue has only been put to rest in our times of high tech. Even with our modern science, we are driving the earth into destruction, destroying the habitats and ecosystems, threatening to destroy all things with atomic warfare, with pollution, etc. And, we surely have proven ourselves incapable of handling our social problems, of assisting places, nations, on earth that suffer from famine, etc.

Since the legal issue is coming to its conclusion, the end of our world, not earth, is approaching. All national governments shall be erased and shall be replaced with God's theocracy with Christ as ruler.
------
Thus about satan's power we read that he is the ruler of this world, that he has the power to cause death. He will gather all the nations in a final attempt of killing everyone on earth since he knows it is soon time for himself to die. It is the old style, 'if I can't have it, neither shall anyone else' philosophy. As you can see, the nations are getting ready for war, the doomsday clock is approaching 12 more than at any other time. As scripture says:
Revelation 11:17-18 . . .God, the Almighty, the One who is and who was, because you have taken your great power and begun ruling as king. 18 But the nations became wrathful, and your own wrath came, and the appointed time for the dead to be judged, and to give [their] reward to your slaves the prophets and to the holy ones and to those fearing your name, the small and the great, and to bring to ruin those ruining the earth.”

At no other time in mankind's history have we been bringing the earth to destruction, but we are now. Those who do so shall be erased, destroyed.​

Please look beyond the first 30 seconds.

Basic info about advanced technology: Link:

​

Do you think God's theocracy to come will be more stable than God's attempted theocracy in Eden? If you take the creation story literally God couldn't manage just two perfect people, how's God gonna manage an entire globe of hardened sinners? Jesus wielding a rod of iron? Sounds like hell on earth to me.

Original sin is nothing more (and nothing less) than our lack of faith in an all powerful God. People read the creation story and wrongly conclude that original sin was an accident that God didn't see coming, but our lack of faith in an all powerful God is by design and part of God's plan. It isn't the things we do or don't do that separate us from God, it's our intrinsic lack of faith that God is in control that separates us from God. What easier way for an all powerful God to show His love for us than to awaken us as a new creation into the kingdom of heaven through the gift of faith? There is no need for God to battle Satan or establish a theocracy to rule with a rod of iron or create nine levels of hell, everything is as it should be because God is in control no further changes required. What becomes of those not (yet) of faith? Whether we realize it or not... faith or not ...God views us all as an important part of His perfect plan, no further changes required. Some folks anxiously await a bloody Armageddon where God vanquishes sin death and the power of the devil from the face of the earth through an epic battle in a nail-biting struggle of good versus evil. Better reading I suppose than suggesting God will (eventually) open our eyes through faith and allow everyone to see the perfection of His plan.

I expect some folks will give me a good talking to now. I can't change anyone's mind but I won't mind the company.

Blessings!

 

[Grandliseur]

Do you think God's theocracy to come will be more stable than God's attempted theocracy in Eden? If you take the creation story literally God couldn't manage just two perfect people, how's God gonna manage an entire globe of hardened sinners? Jesus wielding a rod of iron? Sounds like hell on earth to me.

Original sin is nothing more (and nothing less) than our lack of faith in an all powerful God. People read the creation story and wrongly conclude that original sin was an accident that God didn't see coming, but our lack of faith in an all powerful God is by design and part of God's plan. It isn't the things we do or don't do that separate us from God, it's our intrinsic lack of faith that God is in control that separates us from God. What easier way for an all powerful God to show His love for us than to awaken us as a new creation into the kingdom of heaven through the gift of faith? There is no need for God to battle Satan or establish a theocracy to rule with a rod of iron or create nine levels of hell, everything is as it should be because God is in control no further changes required. What becomes of those not (yet) of faith? Whether we realize it or not... faith or not ...God views us all as an important part of His perfect plan, no further changes required. Some folks anxiously await a bloody Armageddon where God vanquishes sin death and the power of the devil from the face of the earth through an epic battle in a nail-biting struggle of good versus evil. Better reading I suppose than suggesting God will (eventually) open our eyes through faith and allow everyone to see the perfection of His plan.

I expect some folks will give me a good talking to now. I can't change anyone's mind but I won't mind the company.

Blessings!

I am all in favor that as many as possible are saved. I believe Paradise will be on earth. I do believe that Evil exists and that some people are Evil. These need to be gone.

There is much to ponder, even about the A&E account. I have a saying, "what is - is. What isn't - is not."
At times, one might want things, situations, accounts of things, to be different, but they aren't, can't be. So, we have to live with what we have. And, in the case, the Bible is the only thing that I can view as God's explanation of things.

What else comes to us in the future remains to be seen. I cannot change that as I cannot change the past. God will do as he pleases, in all cases.

 

[JoshuaTree]

I am all in favor that as many as possible are saved. I believe Paradise will be on earth. I do believe that Evil exists and that some people are Evil. These need to be gone.

There is much to ponder, even about the A&E account. I have a saying, "what is - is. What isn't - is not."
At times, one might want things, situations, accounts of things, to be different, but they aren't, can't be. So, we have to live with what we have. And, in the case, the Bible is the only thing that I can view as God's explanation of things.

What else comes to us in the future remains to be seen. I cannot change that as I cannot change the past. God will do as he pleases, in all cases.

Honest words always make for great company... thank you and God bless you and yours!

 

[Grandliseur]

Honest words always make for great company... thank you and God bless you and yours!

God bless you also. Thank you for the exchange.

 

[Prometheus85]

Did Noah rescue polar bears and animals not native to the middle East? How did he feed all these animals? It's far fetched enough to think he had a boat that could fit them all... to feed them all would be even more Impossible!

There are dozens of major problems with taking the story of Noah's ark literally.

But the the sheer number of animals on the ark is an issue on several levels. 10 billion species on one boat? this insanely high number of animals would need to be transported to the ark is an issue in itself, a logistical nightmare if nothing else.

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Uhhhh... Where is advanced technology and your reasoning for it's destruction found in the bible?..............​

When I read ' advanced technology ' that makes me think: ' atomic energy ' / ' atomic bomb '.

If the ' atomic bomb ' would Not be destroyed, then mankind could annihilate himself off the face of the Earth.
So, it is No wonder that according to Revelation 11:18 B that God will bring to ruin those ruining Earth.
In other words, God will have Jesus step in because mankind can't direct his step - Jeremiah 10:23.

​

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Do you think God's theocracy to come will be more stable than God's attempted theocracy in Eden?

Unlike in Eden, Jesus is King (ruler) of God's kingdom government of Daniel 2:44.
So, yes God's theocratic kingdom government will be more stable (permanent).- Revelation 20:6; 5:9-10; 2:10.
God's purpose was already managed in the words of the first prophecy found at Genesis 3:15.
Jesus proved to the that promised ' seed ' or Messiah.
The main theme of Jesus' teaching at Luke 4:43 was: God's Kingdom.
We can note that Jesus stressed to us to pray for: God's Kingdom to come (thy kingdom come).
Jesus did Not instruct to pray to be 'taken away' to the Kingdom, Nor pray to be 'taken up' to the Kingdom, but rather we are to pray for the Kingdom to come. Come and establish Peace on Earth among persons of goodwill.
That is also why we are all invited to pray the invitation of Revelation 22:20 for Jesus to come.
Come and do away with wickedness. The executional words from Jesus' mouth will rid the Earth of the wicked.
- Isaiah 11:3-4; Revelation 19:14-16. The upright will remain on Earth - Proverbs 2:21-22; Psalms 92:7.
We are nearing the soon coming ' time of separation ' to take place on Earth as per Matthew 25:31-33, 37, 40.
Jesus, as Shepherd, will separate the humble figurative ' sheep ' and they can remain alive on Earth, and continue to live on Earth right into the start of calendar Day One of Jesus' coming 1,000-year governmental rule over Earth.
At that millennial time even 'enemy death' will be No more on Earth as per 1 Corinthians 15:24-26; Isaiah 25:8.
A paradise the Earth will be, right now through eyes of faith this you can see -> Revelation 22:2.
Mankind will see the return of the Genesis ' tree of life ' on Earth for the healing (good health) for earth's nations.

 

[viole]

Excuse me for being facetious, but perhaps you didn't know how to read back then? Or, relatives, family were illiterate?

15 And they (comment: the animals went in) went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life. 16 And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God commanded him: and Jehovah shut him in.​

Noah had nothing to do with gathering the animals. The different animals according to kind were brought by God's angels and as it says, 'God shut him in' God made his angels close the door of the ark. This was no human undertaking, except of course the building of this structure which Noah was shown how to build and what materials to use.

​

Couldn't those angels keep those animals afloat for a while instead of making things so complicated with arks, logistics and so? I can only imagine angels carrying kangaroos, koalas and several thousands of different spider's species around .

Or even more efficiently, why not zap the wicked out of existence and avoid to kill all those poor innocent pets (and spare His future believers from needing to explain the ridiculous)?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Grandliseur]

why not zap the wicked out of existence and avoid to kill all those poor innocent pets (and spare His future believers from needing to explain the ridiculous)?

There is an account of later Israeli history where an angel of God killed specific people from among the Assyrian army (?) 185,000 in one night. It is therefore evident that had God wanted it he could have selectively killed all he wanted without the deluge. So, this then becomes the point in all this, he didn't want this solution.

The things God wanted beginning from the rear is this

• he wanted the earth to be different now so that he could develop the races and impede their interaction until these were developed. For this he needed a world with seas that separated continents, and mountains that also did the same, not what existed pre-deluge. He got that at Babel, where 70 families were spread out over the earth sorted by language sorted by male descendant. (Noah and Genetics - creation.com)
• he needed the Nephilim, the hybrid offspring of angel and human to be destroyed. If these are permanently destroyed or will be given a chance for life later - is unknown and unmentioned.
• he needed the fallen angels to be handled. Two groups existed then, one was imprisoned, the other left to run about doing satan's will under heavy restrictions regarding human procreation.
• he needed the high tech of the fallen angels to be gone though what they built is still visible.

The deluge destroyed all things to the degree that God wanted. It is interesting to note that e.g. around Cuba in 700m deep water pyramidal structures have been discovered. No government has explored this - they are probably hindered from doing so. The point I am making is that the earth after the deluge is vastly different than the one before the deluge. If cities now 700 meter under water used to be above water, this tells us how total the earth was changed.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

Why not?

Obviously the flood being a literal flood doesn't make it a global flood. Or else I would be making the global flood argument. A localized flood fits the narrative perfectly.

God needed to rid the Earth of Nephilim. Which was a very small population in a very specific region of the world. He did so with a localized devastating flood. Makes perfect sense.

I meant taking the story literally, since it literally describes a metric of cubits of water covering the tops of a mountain which literally cannot be covered by a local flood. The only way to make it fit the narrative is to assume an author error, ignore it completely, or rationalize it away with some MacGuffin.
But it's been a busy weekend and I don't want to go around this circle again. If you really want to get a 'why the flood is global' argument, you can always go to creationwiki or answers in genesis to get their arguments. Was the Flood of Noah Global or Local in Extent?
(And some other theological issues with the 'local flood' story)

 

[Grandliseur]

It is describing a flood if taken literally would be global. Making it a local flood still doesn't make sense narritively and the attempts to do so merely reflect Christian apologetics. Believing for the need to believe, not because of compelling reason.

But you cling to your mytholgical timeline, the rest of us are moving on.

We all move at our own pace. There are many claims that science cannot verify, be they scientific or so called mythical. We have evidence enough for our satisfaction of our faith.

Here is a little fun for you. Around Cuba, a sunken city about 700m deep lies, unexplored by nations though they have been made aware of it.
You can find a non-religious article where it is mentioned here:
The Exceptional Underwater City of Cuba: A New Theory on its Origins – Part I

How do you propose to explain how a city obviously once above water now lies 700 m below the surface?
Wouldn't a global catastrophe be needed for such extreme changes?
Weird things have been found deep in coal mines that shouldn't exist. And, so much more. Clearly, the history we have been given in schools, and higher centers of learning - is nothing but fiction. The powers that be want to impose their concept of history upon us, not what we actually observe out there.

On most mountain tops, you can find sea shells or fossilized remains of sea creatures. Why is that? Again, each may think up their explanation, and some of us believes the Bible's account.

 

[Grandliseur]

I meant taking the story literally, since it literally describes a metric of cubits of water covering the tops of a mountain which literally cannot be covered by a local flood. The only way to make it fit the narrative is to assume an author error, ignore it completely, or rationalize it away with some MacGuffin.
But it's been a busy weekend and I don't want to go around this circle again. If you really want to get a 'why the flood is global' argument, you can always go to creationwiki or answers in genesis to get their arguments. Was the Flood of Noah Global or Local in Extent?
(And some other theological issues with the 'local flood' story)

Your cartoon is both funny and makes its point nicely.

 

[ADigitalArtist]

We all move at our own pace. There are many claims that science cannot verify, be they scientific or so called mythical. We have evidence enough for our satisfaction of our faith.

Here is a little fun for you. Around Cuba, a sunken city about 700m deep lies, unexplored by nations though they have been made aware of it.
You can find a non-religious article where it is mentioned here:
The Exceptional Underwater City of Cuba: A New Theory on its Origins – Part I

How do you propose to explain how a city obviously once above water now lies 700 m below the surface?
Wouldn't a global catastrophe be needed for such extreme changes?
Weird things have been found deep in coal mines that shouldn't exist. And, so much more. Clearly, the history we have been given in schools, and higher centers of learning - is nothing but fiction. The powers that be want to impose their concept of history upon us, not what we actually observe out there.

On most mountain tops, you can find sea shells or fossilized remains of sea creatures. Why is that? Again, each may think up their explanation, and some of us believes the Bible's account.

I can find similar sites with all sorts of bigfoot and alien claims. The actual archaeological evidence of this proposed city is scant, only two sonar readings and no direct sampling. So far not a single man-made item/dweling has been identified there in well over a decade since the original sonar readings were taken. And this wouldn't be the first time that shapes thought to be man-made structures underwater turned out to be submerged natural formations (such as from crust collapse) (re: Yonguri Monument)
And it's worth bearing in mind that just because a shape is geometric doesn't mean it was carved. These are all natural formations:

 

[Grandliseur]

I can find similar sites with all sorts of bigfoot and alien claims. The actual archaeological evidence of this proposed city is scant, only two sonar readings and no direct sampling. So far not a single man-made item/dweling has been identified there in well over a decade since the original sonar readings were taken. And this wouldn't be the first time that shapes thought to be man-made structures underwater turned out to be submerged natural formations (such as from crust collapse) (re: Yonguri Monument)
And it's worth bearing in mind that just because a shape is geometric doesn't mean it was carved. These are all natural formations:

You have a point. However, it is not the only underwater city or human architecture found under water that clearly are human in origin.
Even in Europe, the reason we find a lot of amber and tusks from animals still fished out of the seabed between England and Denmark, etc. is because what used to be forest and land is now deep water. So, there are a lot of things to consider.

I just thought to comment on things.

 

[Subduction Zone]

We all move at our own pace. There are many claims that science cannot verify, be they scientific or so called mythical. We have evidence enough for our satisfaction of our faith.

This would either be a lie or a delusion. There is no valid evidence for your claims. You have not been able to post any, yet there are mountains of evidence against the flood myth. You have to ultimately believe in a lying God to believe the Noah's Ark myth.

Here is a little fun for you. Around Cuba, a sunken city about 700m deep lies, unexplored by nations though they have been made aware of it.
You can find a non-religious article where it is mentioned here:
The Exceptional Underwater City of Cuba: A New Theory on its Origins – Part I\/

Do you have a non-woo site that supports this claim? That link is a joke, if you want to claim evidence you need to supply something much better than that.

How do you propose to explain how a city obviously once above water now lies 700 m below the surface?
Wouldn't a global catastrophe be needed for such extreme changes?
Weird things have been found deep in coal mines that shouldn't exist. And, so much more. Clearly, the history we have been given in schools, and higher centers of learning - is nothing but fiction. The powers that be want to impose their concept of history upon us, not what we actually observe out there.

What "city"? Again, find a non-woo site and this claim will be taken more seriously.

On most mountain tops, you can find sea shells or fossilized remains of sea creatures. Why is that? Again, each may think up their explanation, and some of us believes the Bible's account.

WoW!! Absolutely no understanding of even basic geology. That material used to be in a shallow sea. Plate tectonics explains how mountains are built. The fossils found in strata do not fit the observations that we would see if they were from a worldwide flood. Without even understanding how mountains are made you should be able to see how fossils are not evidence for a flood, if anything they are evidence against it.

The good news is that in regards to whether you are a liar or merely delusional is that it appears that you are not lying.