Nephilim

[PLAYER57832]

A few added points.

About Noah gathering all the animals, besides all of the continents being together, we are taking the long lifespans literally because the protective water-layer of the atmosphere would make it possible, so Noah would have had about 100 years for the task of building the ark and gathering the animals. Still a monumental task, but no lightning-santa-claus thing needed.

now these are things I hear mentioned occasionally, but where in the Bible does it say this.. particularly the bit about it taking 100 years to build the ark?

Went looking for it. Found where it says he was 600 when the rains came and they went into the ark(7:6). Thought there was somewhere that it says he was 500 when God called him to start, but can't find that. In any event, it didn't have to be overnight.

I have always been taught that the "year" reference then did not necessarily refer to 365 days.. it might mean more like "seasons". (and there might not have been 4 per year, either)

Also, fewer species may be involved than you would think. Many of what are considered species today may only be sub-species; populations which developed various characteristics to adapt to their circumstances but could still reproduce with each other. This is still consistent with Creationist theory: no new species was created.

There are 2 problems not explained by that, though. The first is the fossil evidence.

Our differences about the fossil record are for another thread, but are you sure that the fossil evidence that you are talking about actually proves things that are inconsistent with what I have said?

I believe that the Bible is true, if that was your question. My point about the fossil record is that there are too many different fossils to say that they were just "different kinds" of life that gave rise to what we see today. But, as you say.. another thread....

The second is that a lot, and I mean a LOT of species are just not mentioned in the Bible at all.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but the Bible never attempts to give a complete list of the species of the earth. Certainly not in the flood account; it just talks about "every kind of animal" and so on.

I would agree that the Bible doesn't attempt to give a complete list.

[PLAYER57832]

A few added points.

About Noah gathering all the animals, besides all of the continents being together, we are taking the long lifespans literally because the protective water-layer of the atmosphere would make it possible, so Noah would have had about 100 years for the task of building the ark and gathering the animals. Still a monumental task, but no lightning-santa-claus thing needed.

now these are things I hear mentioned occasionally, but where in the Bible does it say this.. particularly the bit about it taking 100 years to build the ark?

Went looking for it. Found where it says he was 600 when the rains came and they went into the ark(7:6). Thought there was somewhere that it says he was 500 when God called him to start, but can't find that. In any event, it didn't have to be overnight.

Almost ... in fact that applies to a lot of the arguments around here ...

5:32 When Noah was five hundred years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
6:1 When men began to multiply on earth and daughters were born to them,
6:3 Then the LORD said: "My spirit shall not remain in man forever, since he is but flesh. His days shall comprise one hundred and twenty years."
6:5 When the LORD saw how great was man's wickedness on earth ...
7:4 Seven days from now I will bring rain down on the earth for forty days and forty nights ...
7:5 Noah was six hundred years old when the flood waters came upon the earth.
7:7 Together with his sons, his wife, and his sons' wives, Noah went into the ark because of the waters of the flood.
7:10 As soon as the seven days were over, the waters of the flood came upon the earth.

By the way, I threw in 6:3 just for humor sake. I mean God basically says that 120 is the max age limit for man and this man Noah lives another 100 years without penalty. Basically his sons had wives so that limits the time somewhat. In any event the time to gather all the animals in the world was seven days.

What about the idea that the term "40 days" meant a "long time" , that 3 days meant a "short time"..and "1000" meant basically more than anybody would want to count. (just like we say "a million ...." today -- without necessarily meaning 1,000,000 exactly)

(not sure about the 7).

[b.k. barunt]

Interesting point on the separation of the continents. You have to dig a bit for it, but the scriptures would indicate that the separation of the continents happened within a generation (40 years or so) around the same time as the Tower of Babel.


Honibaz

? care to explain?

Around the time of the Tower of Babel there was a man named "Peleg". When i used to study the Bible i'd look up the meanings of names, as that frequently contributed to the context. According to Genesis 10:25 "Peleg" was so named because "in his days was the earth divided". Since God "divided" the people by confusing their speech at Babel i figured the name meant "confusion" or "babbling" or somesuch. You can check out the Hebrew meaning of the word "Peleg" in any Hebrew lexicon - it means earthquake.

Evidently confusing their language wasn't enough for God as far as keeping them separated.


Honibaz

[PLAYER57832]

Interesting point on the separation of the continents. You have to dig a bit for it, but the scriptures would indicate that the separation of the continents happened within a generation (40 years or so) around the same time as the Tower of Babel.


Honibaz

? care to explain?

Around the time of the Tower of Babel there was a man named "Peleg". When i used to study the Bible i'd look up the meanings of names, as that frequently contributed to the context. According to Genesis 10:25 "Peleg" was so named because "in his days was the earth divided". Since God "divided" the people by confusing their speech at Babel i figured the name meant "confusion" or "babbling" or somesuch. You can check out the Hebrew meaning of the word "Peleg" in any Hebrew lexicon - it means earthquake.

Evidently confusing their language wasn't enough for God as far as keeping them separated.


Honibaz

Thanks!

[2dimes]

Did you ever study Hebrew the language b.k.?

[daddy1gringo]

Also, fewer species may be involved than you would think. Many of what are considered species today may only be sub-species; populations which developed various characteristics to adapt to their circumstances but could still reproduce with each other. This is still consistent with Creationist theory: no new species was created.

There are 2 problems not explained by that, though. The first is the fossil evidence.

Our differences about the fossil record are for another thread, but are you sure that the fossil evidence that you are talking about actually proves things that are inconsistent with what I have said?

I believe that the Bible is true, if that was your question.

No, actually it wasn't. You've made it pretty clear what you believe.

My question is based on my conviction that many of the things that are considered proof of evolution as opposed to creationism are not really. For example they prove that species adapt and change by a natural selection process, which is consistent with creationism, but don't prove that new species have thereby been created, which would not be.

Unlike some, I would not claim that the scientific evidence disproves evolution, but that it does fit at least as well into the creationist model, properly understood, as it does the evolutionary one. Which thread do you think we should move this to, "The Flood" or "young earth creationism..." or some other?

[PLAYER57832]

My question is based on my conviction that many of the things that are considered proof of evolution as opposed to creationism are not really. For example they prove that species adapt and change by a natural selection process, which is consistent with creationism, but don't prove that new species have thereby been created, which would not be.

Unlike some, I would not claim that the scientific evidence disproves evolution, but that it does fit at least as well into the creationist model, properly understood, as it does the evolutionary one. Which thread do you think we should move this to, "The Flood" or "young earth creationism..." or some other?

Well, addressing your first paragraph would require getting into too many details, some of which are already covered elsewhere.

Second, it depends on whether you mean "creationism" as in "made by God, the Bible is true, etc" OR if you mean the more narrow version, put forward by IRC, which is the group that claims the title "scientific creationism". However, I believe you said you were not a young earther, so that would exclude most of their arguments. (truly, it would)

If you are referring to a different idea, well, again, it gets into details largely touched upon in other threads.

[b.k. barunt]

Did you ever study Hebrew the language b.k.?

I sat in on my son's Hebrew class once . . .

Actually i've studied Hebrew and Greek words and their roots quite a bit. I've never studied the grammar or syntax of either language though.


Honibaz

[2dimes]

I sat in on my son's Hebrew class once . . .

Actually i've studied Hebrew and Greek words and their roots quite a bit. I've never studied the grammar or syntax of either language though.


Honibaz

I'd like to learn it but never got far with French. I used to attend a Messianic Jewish congregation. I picked up quite a few words but couldn't use any to form a sentance of my own.
Can your son speak it?

[Lionz]

Already been nice responses to some stuff asked to me maybe, but...

Jim,

It might be that many folky simply thought Noah was crazy.

Doc,

It would not have made much sense for Noah to have brought a full grown t-rex onto the ark maybe.

Tzor,

You sure Genesis 6:3 refers to a max age limit for man? What if it contains words that were said 120 years before the flood? Not saying it does perhaps... never read an original and I'm not sure what He's said perhaps. Noah lived hundreds of years even after the flood though maybe.

Thread,

Thoughts having to do with Genesis 6:20? I'm not sure if Noah had to travel miles to find animals maybe, but maybe I've never read an original of that and I'm not sure what He's said.

[King Doctor]

Doc,

It would not have made much sense for Noah to have brought a full grown t-rex onto the ark maybe.

But taking a baby one would have yielded the same result as leaving it to die.

So how did this Noah guy do it?

[daddy1gringo]

Doc,

It would not have made much sense for Noah to have brought a full grown t-rex onto the ark maybe.

But taking a baby one would have yielded the same result as leaving it to die.

So how did this Noah guy do it?

"Young" is a relative term. The young creature could be perfectly viable but not full sized, especially with what I said before about long lifespans and reptiles growing all their lives.

[notyou2]

When the local fishermen catch live lobsters they put elastics around their claws.

Mayhaps Noah put an elastic around the jaws of the T Rex

[notyou2]

Interesting point on the separation of the continents. You have to dig a bit for it, but the scriptures would indicate that the separation of the continents happened within a generation (40 years or so) around the same time as the Tower of Babel.


Honibaz

? care to explain?

Around the time of the Tower of Babel there was a man named "Peleg". When i used to study the Bible i'd look up the meanings of names, as that frequently contributed to the context. According to Genesis 10:25 "Peleg" was so named because "in his days was the earth divided". Since God "divided" the people by confusing their speech at Babel i figured the name meant "confusion" or "babbling" or somesuch. You can check out the Hebrew meaning of the word "Peleg" in any Hebrew lexicon - it means earthquake.

Evidently confusing their language wasn't enough for God as far as keeping them separated.


Honibaz

Perhaps dividing the earth was the sea entering the Mediterranean basin and has nothing to do with Pangea being divided.

[Lionz]

Would it really have Doc?

[PLAYER57832]

Interesting point on the separation of the continents. You have to dig a bit for it, but the scriptures would indicate that the separation of the continents happened within a generation (40 years or so) around the same time as the Tower of Babel.


Honibaz

? care to explain?

Around the time of the Tower of Babel there was a man named "Peleg". When i used to study the Bible i'd look up the meanings of names, as that frequently contributed to the context. According to Genesis 10:25 "Peleg" was so named because "in his days was the earth divided". Since God "divided" the people by confusing their speech at Babel i figured the name meant "confusion" or "babbling" or somesuch. You can check out the Hebrew meaning of the word "Peleg" in any Hebrew lexicon - it means earthquake.

Evidently confusing their language wasn't enough for God as far as keeping them separated.


Honibaz

Perhaps dividing the earth was the sea entering the Mediterranean basin and has nothing to do with Pangea being divided.

There are a lot of theories about this. The ancient Mediterranean was apparently fairly active volcanically. However, I have yet to hear anything that is more than just a potential theory, something interesting, but nothing firm.

[Nephilim]

get my name outcha mouth

[Lionz]

[jonesthecurl]

http://www.coventrytelegraph.net/news/coventry-news/2010/06/29/image-of-jesus-christ-appears-on-wyken-drainpipe-92746-26743816/

[Lionz]

[tzor]

I'm not sure, but I think lionz has, passed tin foil hat land, crossed bizarro land, and now lives in la la land.

[Lionz]

When do geometric relationships lie and where have angels lived if not in the heavens?

[jonesthecurl]

Tooting?

[tzor]

When do geometric relationships lie and where have angels lived if not in the heavens?

That desn't look like the "heavens" to me, it looks like some damn rock.

Where do the angels live? In the notion of the universe as understood by the writers of the Old Testament, the stars were not in the heavens but in the "firmament." (Or if you want to get terminology picky the "raqiya.") The heavens are beyond this. If we take the notion that God inspired these writers then we must infer that the angels live "beyond the stars." A better way would be to imply that the heavens are actually "beyond the universe."

[jonesthecurl]

To infinity and beyond!

- was Buzz Lightyear an angel?