hers another one i dont get either

supposedly the FLOOD covered all the earth by 15 cubits of water in genisis 7-19 and 20 - thats only 22.5 ft of water at 18" per cubit - so my question is were the tallest mountains then only less than 22.5 ft high? if so which i dont buy, then was mount arrarat which is the mountain the ark supposedly came to rest upon of this height or less?

compared to the dimensions of the ark - 450 ft. in length, it would be like resting on a hill not a mountain correct? Of course i suspect you will try to say mt arrarat has grown over time, but listen carefully what is being stated is that "NO" mountains >>any where on the pangian continent<< were any higher than 22.5 ft - ?? again - WTF???

By the way Mt arrarats height today is 16,916 ft tall with other mts. close by of somewhat the same height.




Tribo,
The bible says that the waters rose higher and higher, until all the highest mountains everywhere were submerged, the crest(the highest rise) rising fifteen cubits higher than the submerged mountains. Genesis 7,17-20. Maybe you need to read more carefully before you freak out.

Also, there were no animal sacrifices until later, in the days of Abraham, not spoken of until Chapter 15 vs 9 and on. This was long after Noah had died.
It's all about faith and reading properly what is written.

So Jeannie,

Why are you irritating all these nice serious people?

Can't you go somewhere else and play?

These people are all on the bus to heaven. They aren't used to being tormented by evil Jeannies.

Because I can I guess.

Actually, I was going real easy on her, She seems like a nice person. I guess she got irritated with me.

I guess she doesn't think I'm serious?
I'm very serious.

Of course my agenda is to tell the truth and some people don't like that.

Oh well.

JB

Tribo,
The bible says that the waters rose higher and higher, until all the highest mountains everywhere were submerged, the crest(the highest rise) rising fifteen cubits higher than the submerged mountains. Genesis 7,17-20. Maybe you need to read more carefully before you freak out.

Also, there were no animal sacrifices until later, in the days of Abraham, not spoken of until Chapter 15 vs 9 and on. This was long after Noah had died.
It's all about faith and reading properly what is written.



i think we both better read closer - noah offered sacrifices after he left the ark, GEN: 8 vs 20 ,21

.

i think we both better read closer - noah offered sacrifices after he left the ark, GEN: 8 vs 20 ,21

.


I sit corrected. It is written where you say it is. Oops! Sorry. I was trying to help. Thanks for letting me know i was wrong. Donnar

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?

edited for brevity.



I believe I said that he needed to keep at least 2, as opposed to refering to a specific number of sacrifices. I don't recall that the text was specific on hw many sacrifices there were - just that there were.




We would determine here that it would be "everything" as per Noah's understanding. Since God did not specifically tell Noah to gather any of the creatures of the sea - it would be concluded that "everything" to Noah did not include them either. Therefore, it would be taking the text out of it's context to expect that "everything under heaven" would include the creatures of the sea as well.



Even though we're not going there - I think it's just the wall that remains, not anything of the Temple. The Islamic mosque is located where the temple was.

If you could come up with a reasonable explination why it was impossible - I'd be willing to hear it out. Since this post is unconvincing. Which of the species on earth would you like to prove didn't come off the Ark?

It was 22.5 feet above the highest mountain. That means the hight of the mountains don't figure into the equation. Where are you getting your math to compute the mountins are only 22.5'?
And naturally you wouldn't buy it - were you calculating from sea level?

sorry Eljay , i am not interested in these things i've raised anymore, i have re-read much and have made conclusions that are error as to what i have stated, so its a moot point, but thnx anyway - sorry.

Sorry if this is getting off topic but Tribo, I was spinning through the channels last night and a movie called "Noah's Ark" was on. I’m not sure if it was in the theatre at one point but it was a large scale production with special effects. Noah was played by that actor Jon Voight. It was alright I guess. Kind of funny in parts. The ark itself was enormous but probably about the size of like an aircraft carrier today. It was kind of interesting to see like an actual depiction of it and how they had all the animals on board. Also god, evidently, "relieved" the animals of their urge to procreate during the journey but not so much with the humans....

If the dimensions were correct John Voight would have been the skipper of a medium sized oil tanker ...

How romantic!

Although baby oil at the right time and in the right place can have a few godly references uttered

That's about right. Anyway, Im just saying in the movie they did attempt to give some sense of comparative proportion and an aircraft carrier would have been close, with a hull and all of these animal cages stacked up. It was quite ridiculous and they also had gorillas running around. It just didnt strike me as a very secure arangement at all. Not to mention they had to feed these animals and give them fresh water daily. ALL of the required various diets mind you.

Ligers-http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/08/photogalleries/ligers_dynamite/images/primary/Liger1.jpg

AND

Tigons-http://www.geocities.com/pride_lands/nathaniel2.jpg


Were these on the ark? Not unless they had captive breeding programs going on there....

Thou shalt not misspell thine neurotransmitters.

I noticed I cant go back and edit for some reason but just for a little background info.

The Liger is a hybrid cross between a male lion and a female tiger.

The Tigon is a hybrid cross between a male tiger and a female lion.

I don't think there's ever been any arguement of animals of the same species being able to breed together K, there all of the same single order or species - >>> kitteous Katteous <<<

they are still of the same kind. What bothers me is nothing is shown of a lets say, a lizard mating with another species - any species and coming up with a "new" species. To me that would be real proof of evolution, even though i understand what your intentions to state are not of this, that you beleive that small changes within a species eventually leads to a whole new creature within that species. Just my thought

Actually I was addressing the question that was posed. If these animals that I mentioned, Ligers and Tigons, were present at role call on the Arc. My argument is no, how could they have been? These animals have been produced exclusively by man through a process of selective breeding. Tigers and lions would not breed in the wild. Lions are social and live in large extended family groupings called “prides”. Tigers are solitary in nature. They also have VERY different courtship rituals. Anyway Tribo I don’t believe that the story of Noah and his Ark is authentic. Not in the sense that the animals were transported during a large flood to be rescued. That’s not to say that a guy named Noah did not build a large boat or something along those lines and loaded a bunch of animals on it. He might have been suffering from a mental illness of some determination. He might have thought he heard god or some unknown power commanding him to take these animals away somewhere. Who knows? Doesn’t make it factual or unembellished.

I've been assured by no less than our resident catholic contributor, Miguel/TLW - that this is to be looked at as no more or less that a story/fable - with the purpose of showing some intended motive for the religious. So no need to worry that beautiful little head of yours about it -



see page 1 - the lonely walker.

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.