Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I think it is interesting that not once do any of the writers of the Old Testament or New Testament consider Noah or the flood to be a cute story not based on fact. I'll just quote the New Testament since it would be too many verses if the OT were quoted:
Mat_24:37 For even as the days of Noah, thus shall be the presence of the Son of Mankind."
Mat_24:38 For as they were in those days before the deluge, masticating and drinking and marrying and taking in marriage until the day on which Noah entered into the ark,
Luk_3:36 of Cainan, of Arphaxad, of Shem, of Noah, of Lamech,
Luk_17:26 And according as it occurred in the days of Noah, thus will it be in the days of the Son of Mankind also."
Luk_17:27 They ate, they drank, they married, they took out in marriage, until the day on which Noah entered into the ark, and the deluge came and destroys them all."
Heb_11:7 By faith Noah, being apprized concerning that which is not as yet being observed, being pious, constructs an ark for the salvation of his house, through which he condemns the world, and became an enjoyer of the allotment of the righteousness which accords with faith."
1Pe_3:20 He heralds to those once stubborn, when the patience of God awaited in the days of Noah while the ark was being constructed, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were brought safely through water,
2Pe_2:5 and spares not the ancient world, but guards Noah, an eighth, a herald of righteousness, bringing a deluge on the world of the irreverent;"
Here is an interesting article on the Grand Canyon proving a world-wide flood:
You are quite right whopps. The origins of the tale in the wide-spread Mesopotamian Flood myth are obvious. Eusebius' assertion that the genesis version predated the Sumerian original died quicker than my 'which same page?' thread, when I asked for just ONE Genesis version amongst the dozens of Mesopotamian versions.
Yes the freeze - dried ecalyptus leaves was fun. It did add another element of Genius to old Noah as he had worked out that, if you took food up above the snowline of the Zagros mountains it would freeze- dry like the Incas did to potatoes thousands of years later. And of course some method had to be worked out of keeping it edible for a year or two (until the eucalyptus seeds regrew) on board the ark.
Really it is the whole flood and animal scenario rather than the Ark itself (suspect though it is) that makes nonsense of it and of course the Mesopotamian flood myth simply explains how the iron - age writers got stuck with it.
You are quite right whopps. The origins of the tale in the wide-spread Mesopotamian Flood myth are obvious. Eusebius' assertion that the genesis version predated the Sumerian original died quicker than my 'which same page?' thread, when I asked for just ONE Genesis version amongst the dozens of Mesopotamian versions.
Yes the freeze - dried ecalyptus leaves was fun. It did add another element of Genius to old Noah as he had worked out that, if you took food up above the snowline of the Zagros mountains it would freeze- dry like the Incas did to potatoes thousands of years later. And of course some method had to be worked out of keeping it edible for a year or two (until the eucalyptus seeds regrew) on board the ark.
Really it is the whole flood and animal scenario rather than the Ark itself (suspect though it is) that makes nonsense of it and of course the Mesopotamian flood myth simply explains how the iron - age writers got stuck with it.
To state the Genesis flood was just a localized Mesopotamian flood really shows ignorance. It is impossible for the mountains to be flooded above their peaks in Mesopotamia without the rest of the entire world being flooded. To the east of Mesopotamia you have the mountains upwards of 14,000 feet in height. To the west you have the low lands. I doubt the Meso people believed there was an invisible wall holding up the waters to the west to a height of 14,000 feet, unless one believes in a similar fanciful story such as evolution. I mean, if one believes in evolution they may as well believe in just as fanciful a story that just the mesopotamian area was flooded in Noah's day.
I see no problem with Noah freeze drying food. The higher one goes up the mountains the less pressure there is. I used to mountain climb and used water filled compasses. The higher you go the compass would develope a bubble in it due to the lowered pressure. This lowered pressure helps to extract water from the food. It is not that difficult to understand unless you believe in mind-numbing evolution.
Sumer was founded by one of Noah's sons' children. That's a fact. So how could a Sumerian writing pre-date the flood? "Nimrod, son of Cush, also identified as a mighty hunter before God, and the founder of ancient Babel, Akkad, Sumer, and possibly cities in Assyria." Sons of Noah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Your "belief" is contrary to the evidenciary record, of which there is none, i.e. no record of such a flood.
If there is no evidenciary record, how can it be against that record?
But of course there is plenty of evidence of a world-wide flood. Just because you have not seen it does not mean it does not exist. Scientists around the world are proving the evidenciary record of a world-wide flood.
See heres the thing...those Egyptians came about 1000 years later than noah, in which development was a tad much more advanced. And you still don't see much in the way or large scale projects until past the pre dynastic period and into the old kingdom.
That's because it took that long to re-populate the area after the flood so they could enter into large scale projects.
Quote:
And 'light carriers' as you say were still over 600 ft, and you still cannot provision them for a years duty. Even today they only carry enough for 90 days, and that is with modern methods of refrigeration and cooking. How much jerky, and stale bread do you think ol noahs barge could hold.
Obviously Noah was able to provision the ark for a year or more because he as well as family and animals all made it through the world-wide flood just fine. Just because modern-day aircraft carriers with enough people to house a small city need re-provisioning does not mean Noah needed re-provisioning. The carrier houses all the aircraft, plus fuel and engines, repair-shops, bomb-housing areas as well as all the other areas to store combat materials. The USS Ronald Reagan housed 5,500 sailors. Get rid of all the combat related stuff, i.e., engine, fuel areas etc. and they would not need to re-provision.
"The Ruler class carriers were similar to the previous Attacker class. The Attacker class ships had been built with two 42ft x 34 lifts, a 438ft flight deck that was often increased to 450ft and hangers longer than in previous escort carriers, at 262ft by 62ft with 18ft of clear head room. Most of the Ruler class carriers had the 450ft flight deck and the same hanger size. The catapult was made more powerful, and could launch an 8,500lb aircraft. The fuel capacity was reduced. Sources differ on the number of aircraft that could be operated, with some stating 18 to 24 and others suggesting as many as 30. Three times as many aircraft could be ferried. Ruler class escort carriers
Noah's ark, according to the verified historical records was at least 450 feet long.
That's because it took that long to re-populate the area after the flood so they could enter into large scale projects.
:
Noah's ark, according to the verified historical records was at least 450 feet long.
According to these "historical records", what year was this Noah's ark put to use?
That's because it took that long to re-populate the area after the flood so they could enter into large scale projects.
Obviously Noah was able to provision the ark for a year or more because he as well as family and animals all made it through the world-wide flood just fine. Just because modern-day aircraft carriers with enough people to house a small city need re-provisioning does not mean Noah needed re-provisioning. The carrier houses all the aircraft, plus fuel and engines, repair-shops, bomb-housing areas as well as all the other areas to store combat materials. The USS Ronald Reagan housed 5,500 sailors. Get rid of all the combat related stuff, i.e., engine, fuel areas etc. and they would not need to re-provision.
"The Ruler class carriers were similar to the previous Attacker class. The Attacker class ships had been built with two 42ft x 34 lifts, a 438ft flight deck that was often increased to 450ft and hangers longer than in previous escort carriers, at 262ft by 62ft with 18ft of clear head room. Most of the Ruler class carriers had the 450ft flight deck and the same hanger size. The catapult was made more powerful, and could launch an 8,500lb aircraft. The fuel capacity was reduced. Sources differ on the number of aircraft that could be operated, with some stating 18 to 24 and others suggesting as many as 30. Three times as many aircraft could be ferried. Ruler class escort carriers
Noah's ark, according to the verified historical records was at least 450 feet long.
My friend it would be near impossible to repopulate a land with 3 couples in 1000 years. Unless somehow infant, and child mortality rates were near zero. And the death toll among childbirth zilch it is pretty much impossible. Oh lord once you are proven wrong you have to reach into the depths of support ships to try and prove your point? Even those carriers were 100 ft longer then noahs ship. But lets for the sake of argument just say they were about the same size. Even modern super carriers can only run with the provisions they have for about 90 days before needing to resupply. They also have advantages over things since refrigeration makes the amount of food available much more diverse. Noah would have been stuck with pretty much dried meat, and some sun dried fruits and vegetables. Again.....you would have thousands of animals,plus noahs family, and food. You have no way to maintain sanitary conditions with essentially all the worlds zoos of today in one ship either. Also how is noah going to have food for a year when carriers of today only have about 90 days of provisions? But you negate the space you just gained when you added all those animals, many of which are carnivores i might add. I guess they just adapted their diets for the journey :roll eyes:.
Obviously Noah was able to provision the ark for a year or more because he as well as family and animals all made it through the world-wide flood just fine.
There it is again folks! His argument when cornered is nothing better than....
'Well it MUST have happened because the Bible SAYS it happened'.
Come on folks! It's time we left it to die....he's a troll of the first order.
You are quite right whopps. The origins of the tale in the wide-spread Mesopotamian Flood myth are obvious. Eusebius' assertion that the genesis version predated the Sumerian original died quicker than my 'which same page?' thread, when I asked for just ONE Genesis version amongst the dozens of Mesopotamian versions.
Yes the freeze - dried ecalyptus leaves was fun. It did add another element of Genius to old Noah as he had worked out that, if you took food up above the snowline of the Zagros mountains it would freeze- dry like the Incas did to potatoes thousands of years later. And of course some method had to be worked out of keeping it edible for a year or two (until the eucalyptus seeds regrew) on board the ark.
Really it is the whole flood and animal scenario rather than the Ark itself (suspect though it is) that makes nonsense of it and of course the Mesopotamian flood myth simply explains how the iron - age writers got stuck with it.
Yes indeed! Once one realizes that the Biblical Flood Myth is merely an adaptation of older Flood myths (as we learned in the 1800s indisputably), it becomes clear that any attempts at "proving" the Genesis account's "historicity" will automatically fail.
An method of a typical Biblical Literalist would be arguing for the historicity of the events told in West-Side Story (which everyone knows is based on Romeo and Juliet -written at least 400 years previously), and claiming that Shakespeare's Romeo and Juliet is based on West-Side Story. When confronted by evidence, the would-be-historian and West-Side-Advocate would claim that Romeo and Juliet came later because West Side Story says so! Their argument would run like this: according to West-Side Story, Leonard Bernstein (composer of West-Side) gave birth to Belinda, who gave birth to Dumpy, who gave birth to Shakespeare - from whom William came. It's so obvious that all those Shakespeare scholars are just full of crap, right? Ha haaa
A further example follows:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eusebius
To state the Genesis flood was just a localized Mesopotamian flood really shows ignorance. It is impossible for the mountains to be flooded above their peaks in Mesopotamia without the rest of the entire world being flooded. To the east of Mesopotamia you have the mountains upwards of 14,000 feet in height. To the west you have the low lands. I doubt the Meso people believed there was an invisible wall holding up the waters to the west to a height of 14,000 feet, unless one believes in a similar fanciful story such as evolution. I mean, if one believes in evolution they may as well believe in just as fanciful a story that just the mesopotamian area was flooded in Noah's day.
I see no problem with Noah freeze drying food. The higher one goes up the mountains the less pressure there is. I used to mountain climb and used water filled compasses. The higher you go the compass would develope a bubble in it due to the lowered pressure. This lowered pressure helps to extract water from the food. It is not that difficult to understand unless you believe in mind-numbing evolution.
Sumer was founded by one of Noah's sons' children. That's a fact. So how could a Sumerian writing pre-date the flood? "Nimrod, son of Cush, also identified as a mighty hunter before God, and the founder of ancient Babel, Akkad, Sumer, and possibly cities in Assyria." Sons of Noah - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Smack your head ( ) all you want, it's not going to make a composite text (Genesis) written and redacted around the Babylonian Exile a reliable witness to Sumerian history. Quoting Wikipedia's repitition of Genesis doesn't make Genesis' account truthful. Wikipedia also disagrees with you on your entire premise.
However....If you smack your head ( ) hard enough, it might compel you to take a course in ancient Near Eastern history, taught by experts on the subject; or even a course on the Bible, taught by Biblical scholars. Heck, it might even compel you to pick up a book on the subject. Heck, most Bibles include helpful notes concerning the subject nowadays.
There it is again folks! His argument when cornered is nothing better than....
'Well it MUST have happened because the Bible SAYS it happened'.
Come on folks! It's time we left it to die....he's a troll of the first order.
Ha ha - yes, a fine bit of bad reasoning he made.
"Obviously, Hansel and Gretel were able to fool the wicked witch into thinking they weren't ready to be eaten by using a bone, BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T EATEN!"
And THAT - is why it actually happened.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
