100% FREE ONLINE DATING
sponsored links
Previous
| Topic: NOAH'S ARK - WTF?? | |
|---|---|
|
Edited by
tribo
on
Fri 08/22/08 01:08 PM
|
|
Oh I know. I think it’s actually kind of a funny story. The mental image it conjures up! That movie I told you about with Jon Voight was hilarious. I mean it wasn’t intended to be but it was. It’s also launched countless names for veterinarian clinics and pet shops. They are very often Noah's this and Noah's that.  yeah, in fact we ad one when i lived in chicago area BIG pet store called Noah's ark - boy they had alot of animals and imports to. lot's of Macaws and other parrots foxes, flying squirrels, bats, big snakes, incredible fish, octopus, squid, etc. prarie dogs, hippo's [joke] dinosaurs, sasquatch, aliens [et's], bush babies, or baby bushes  one named george - dumb animal!! but what i liked most of all was this BIG Blue parrot named ike - he would roll over, bark like a dog, feed from your hand, let you scratch his head, and loved attention. he was the owners not for sale - to bad i would have purchased him - hahaha, he had about a 50 word vocabulary and wolf whistled with the best of em - hahaha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parrots are cool. I think they bond with one person generally though. I had a friend who owned a Cockatoo. Those are the big white ones with the feathers that stick up on their heads. Beretta’s bird if you remember that show. Anyway, it bonded with my friend and they become VERY needy. She would cry when he would leave the room and carry on. It’s almost like you become their mate or at least fill that void.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parrots are cool. I think they bond with one person generally though. I had a friend who owned a Cockatoo. Those are the big white ones with the feathers that stick up on their heads. Beretta’s bird if you remember that show. Anyway, it bonded with my friend and they become VERY needy. She would cry when he would leave the room and carry on. It’s almost like you become their mate or at least fill that void. your absolutely right - i had a freind who'd had his big McCaw for years and he was the same way and he would not let you near him hahaha |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Why don tu all watch Evan almighty its and awesome movie!! And by the way u all gotta start buildin ur arks now in ur back yards!!! cause its gonna happen again!!! n this time 4get about the animals!!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Getting back on topic here, there was supossed to be 40 days and 40 nights of rain that raised the ocean levels by 29,000 feet to cover the Earth. How could anyone survive a 30 foot an hour deluge? Approximately 6 inches a minute! Maybe God provided Noah and his family with snorkels?
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Sat 08/23/08 11:54 AM
|
|
This is all the same stuff you already copied and pasted. Do I have to also repost the question? Why do you keep moving it anyway? Besides, now you are interrupting this thread again which was started by Tribo and supposed to be addressing the issue of Noah and his Ark.
Anyway Tribo, Im sorry, Deb is forcing me to do this because she keeps moving this question to various threads. Three times now she has done this. "If the flood happened in 2343BC how come there isn't any break in Egytian culture since they were wiped off the Earth in 2343BC?" Deb this is the question being posed. Please try to focus. We are NOT in any way attempting to belittle you or hurt your feelings, simply asking you to provide supportive evidence for your assertions. The early dynastic period would have started around 3100 BC. Now there is ample evidence to support that the ancient Egyptian culture existed long before the advent of the Pharaoh and extends back to about 5500 BC but for the sake of the posed question, we are not asking that you accept or not accept the existence of the Egyptians as an established culture prior to 3100 BC. Now how did they manage to continue and undeniably flourish into such a tremendously powerful society with no disruption to their existence and no mention of a flood or an impending flood anywhere to be found? Inquiring minds would like to know. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
Krimsa
on
Sat 08/23/08 12:21 PM
|
|
Not to mention, WHERE pray tell is all of this other "evidence" from these other cultures depicting the flood? In a museum somewhere? In a church? In a monastery? In your garage? I want to see it.
If ALL of the hieroglyphic depictions and accounts of the flood were destroyed and that is why we have nothing on record from the Egyptians, why do we still have this "evidence" from these other cultures? Also, Tribo, she just told me that the Egyptians perished (all of them) due to the flood. This is delusional. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
 One man's theology is another man's belly laugh. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
One man's theology is another man's belly laugh. One monkeys picture is another mans grandson 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look up Earth in your Strong's.
Dirt is Earth,the land is Earth. Earth as Global is in our thinking. The animals of that land were on the Ark and water covered the whole land. All of mankind could have been in that land and drown. It sounds more like a local flood. If you were in a boat and water was all around would you not think all the land was under water. With a horizon of about nine miles, if all the mountains are covered in sight. Would you not think all the mountauns are under water. But at fifteen miles mountains could still be above water. If it was a local flood then all problems with understanding are solved. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look up Earth in your Strong's. Dirt is Earth,the land is Earth. Earth as Global is in our thinking. The animals of that land were on the Ark and water covered the whole land. All of mankind could have been in that land and drown. It sounds more like a local flood. If you were in a boat and water was all around would you not think all the land was under water. With a horizon of about nine miles, if all the mountains are covered in sight. Would you not think all the mountauns are under water. But at fifteen miles mountains could still be above water. If it was a local flood then all problems with understanding are solved.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Look up Earth in your Strong's. Dirt is Earth,the land is Earth. Earth as Global is in our thinking. The animals of that land were on the Ark and water covered the whole land. All of mankind could have been in that land and drown. It sounds more like a local flood. If you were in a boat and water was all around would you not think all the land was under water. With a horizon of about nine miles, if all the mountains are covered in sight. Would you not think all the mountauns are under water. But at fifteen miles mountains could still be above water. If it was a local flood then all problems with understanding are solved. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Well I would not argue with you that there have been major floods throughout history in various locations all over the globe. This is common knowledge. These floods are directly and indirectly responsible for much of the earth’s geographical features such as sedimentary strata, fossilization, fossil fuels, submarine canyons, and salt domes. However the major difference here in respect to Noah's flood is that we are talking 40 days and 40 nights of rain raising the ocean levels by 29,000 feet to cover the Earth. How could anyone survive a 30 foot an hour deluge? Approximately 6 in. a minute. That is if you actually accept the bible's testimonial of events. This flood is supposed to have occurred in 2348BC so where would have the Egyptians gone exactly if they were simply washed away? Remember, Queen Cleopatra rules both upper and lower unified Egypt up until the Roman take over at about 30BC. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Edited by
MirrorMirror
on
Mon 08/25/08 06:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, this was debated to some degree already i will post what answers were given already as i go along. Questions: how many of each kind of animal was taken into the ark? GEn.6 19 states 2 of each kind - 1 male and one female. Gen: 7-2 states " of every CLEAN beast thou shalt take to thee by "sevens" [seven males, and 7 females]= 14? And the beast that are NOT CLEAN by 2 the male and his female." ?? these are to be of all animal kinds, cattle, creeping things [bugs,snakes,worms,etc..], birds. No mention of oceanic or water animals? Which is it guys??? - 2 of each kind - 6;19 or 16 of each kind -gen.;7-2???? Gen: cpt 9 vs 1 - " and god blessed Noah and his sons, and said, be fruitful and multiply and ""replenish"" the earth. [??] well now this is bothersome to me - here's why - In gen; 1-vs-28, god tells Adam and eve to be fruitful and multiply and >>replenish<< the earth also?? now i have alredy been told that the word "mahlaw" in hebrew means to to fill or be full and that it "does not" mean to resupply the earth as in regular english - replenish = plenish >>"again"?? to me before i had discussed this word i had accepted the fact that there was a previous race of mankind? but you tried to tell me that the meaning for that word was not correct within the text? So now i approach it again on this basis: The >>exact<< same word is used in the part in noah - and it most definitely means without question = to >> REPOPULATE<< the earth - it has to!!! there is no other choice!!! it CLEARLY states that all life has ceased to exsist except for noah and his family!! So now what? what will you tell me now?? 3) - the aquatic life? in my discussion with eljay on this - it was decided at that point that since it said nothing about all the aquatic life being destroyed but only earth bound [land] life to have been completely terminated, i let it go - now however on close examination i see a verse that says "everything under heaven? which i take to mean everything everywhere not just the land. so were back to finding out this: >IF< all the sea life was utterly destroyed, how did it return? if every living thing in the oceans and seas was destroyed - how could it have possibly come back? noah had the land and air animals and that which creeped upon the land, but the SEA?? uh,uh, so how then did the sealife again emerge? and if you say - well god probably brought it back again but there is no mention? Well then why did he not then destroy the other animals also and just start over again and mankind also? he seem's rather double minded in all his so called dealings with his creations on earth doncha think? well i do!! ok explain all this please. and try to do it within the book as it stands not with untrustworthy exigesis of faulty concordences and other outside sources. thnx. Oh, and were anything but through with this subject matter in genisis. are you speaking of the premise of the "beast's" being humans as some hold in genisis? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
This is a friendly reminder please stay on topic, no attacking others. And do not bring debates from another thread and post them on someone elses threads. There has been some post deleted here due to these reasons. Please go back to the topic in hand. Always keep the topics at a debate and do attack others on a personal note.
Thank You Site Mod Kristi |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Hi eljay - yes you did miss something go back and read my original post - there i bring up the part about: Malaw = replenish in gen 1 and in noahs case also - and spider i think it was telling me it maent to "fill in gensis 1 but now it's used in noakhs the exact same word to most definitely mean = REpopulate!! their is no other choice - i cannot believe that in gen it means one thing and in noahs case what i said it meant to begin with so please explain this to me ok? then i will respond on what you have written above.  Well - it doesn't make any sense that he would have told Adam and Eve to "replenish" the earth. I use the NIV - it says "increase in numbers and fill the earth." Then it says in 9:7 "...be fruitful and increase in number; multiply on the earth and increase upon it." So - where does the idea of "Re-populate" come from again; especially in reference to Adam and Eve? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Parrots are cool. I think they bond with one person generally though. I had a friend who owned a Cockatoo. Those are the big white ones with the feathers that stick up on their heads. Beretta’s bird if you remember that show. Anyway, it bonded with my friend and they become VERY needy. She would cry when he would leave the room and carry on. It’s almost like you become their mate or at least fill that void.  
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok, this was debated to some degree already i will post what answers were given already as i go along. Questions: how many of each kind of animal was taken into the ark? GEn.6 19 states 2 of each kind - 1 male and one female. Gen: 7-2 states " of every CLEAN beast thou shalt take to thee by "sevens" [seven males, and 7 females]= 14? And the beast that are NOT CLEAN by 2 the male and his female." ?? these are to be of all animal kinds, cattle, creeping things [bugs,snakes,worms,etc..], birds. No mention of oceanic or water animals? Which is it guys??? - 2 of each kind - 6;19 or 16 of each kind -gen.;7-2???? Gen: cpt 9 vs 1 - " and god blessed Noah and his sons, and said, be fruitful and multiply and ""replenish"" the earth. [??] well now this is bothersome to me - here's why - In gen; 1-vs-28, god tells Adam and eve to be fruitful and multiply and >>replenish<< the earth also?? now i have alredy been told that the word "mahlaw" in hebrew means to to fill or be full and that it "does not" mean to resupply the earth as in regular english - replenish = plenish >>"again"?? to me before i had discussed this word i had accepted the fact that there was a previous race of mankind? but you tried to tell me that the meaning for that word was not correct within the text? So now i approach it again on this basis: The >>exact<< same word is used in the part in noah - and it most definitely means without question = to >> REPOPULATE<< the earth - it has to!!! there is no other choice!!! it CLEARLY states that all life has ceased to exsist except for noah and his family!! So now what? what will you tell me now?? 3) - the aquatic life? in my discussion with eljay on this - it was decided at that point that since it said nothing about all the aquatic life being destroyed but only earth bound [land] life to have been completely terminated, i let it go - now however on close examination i see a verse that says "everything under heaven? which i take to mean everything everywhere not just the land. so were back to finding out this: >IF< all the sea life was utterly destroyed, how did it return? if every living thing in the oceans and seas was destroyed - how could it have possibly come back? noah had the land and air animals and that which creeped upon the land, but the SEA?? uh,uh, so how then did the sealife again emerge? and if you say - well god probably brought it back again but there is no mention? Well then why did he not then destroy the other animals also and just start over again and mankind also? he seem's rather double minded in all his so called dealings with his creations on earth doncha think? well i do!! ok explain all this please. and try to do it within the book as it stands not with untrustworthy exigesis of faulty concordences and other outside sources. thnx. Oh, and were anything but through with this subject matter in genisis. are you speaking of the premise of the "beast's" being humans as some hold in genisis? |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Uhh, were we not going to address the 40 days and 40 nights of rainfall at all or what? I find this premise implausible and not compatible with human life? So where would the Egyptians have gone because they were still here at 30BC and beyond. Anyone?
|
|
|
|
|
