2006-07-06 12:16:59 · 23 answers · asked by Kenny ♣ 5 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Yep, and if we took it literally the earth is flat and the earth is the center of the galaxy
2006-07-06 12:19:52 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 2⤋
The ark was nowhere near Everest, the water level dropped a bunch and THEN the ark landed on Ararat.
And if you had actually read the story, you would know that the ark didn't land until after the dove brought back the olive branch, proving that the water had gone WAY down before the arck landed, making practically any mountain a possible landing place.
2006-07-06 19:27:34 · answer #2 · answered by DNE 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, the Bible says Mt. Ararat. So if i take it literally then i'd have to say no. It was Mount Ararat.
The problem with people like you is not taking it literally or not. The problem is you have no understanding of it.
Apprently little Miss. âª~â«~âª~â« has never heard of micro evolution.
Besides, the Bible never said he took every species. It says he took two of every living, land animal.
Obviously the species that lived in water didnt need to go onboard.
God didnt have to have them put on the ark...but He did it so people like you would stumble at it, 4000 years later.
2006-07-06 19:19:21 · answer #3 · answered by truebeliever_777 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well.......any of those Bible 'stories' are all very Local in their descriptions since the people of that day did not venture all that far from their place of origin. The Romans came into play much later on. But...you can believe that Noah never had an inkling that there was a place called Africa or that there was a mountain in Asia that tremendous in size. Or that there even was an Asia.
Gee, I wonder how he segregated the Polar bears from the Zebras and the African elephants from the Siberian Tigers in that Ark of his? Need I go on? '-))
2006-07-06 19:29:01 · answer #4 · answered by michael g 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
yup
Well not necessarily but it would have to be one of the top peaks of the world. The bible says the world was covered in water. If he landed while the world was still covered with water he had to have landed in one of the highest places on earth, if not Mt. Everest it would’ve been one of these...
name country continent meters feet
K2 China, Pakistan Asia 8611 28251
Kangchenjunga India, Nepal Asia 8586 28169
Lhotse China, Nepal Asia 8516 27940
Makalu China, Nepal Asia 8485 27838
Kangchenjunga South India, Nepal Asia 8476 27808
Lhotse Middle Nepal Asia 8430 27657
Kangchenjunga West Nepal Asia 8420 27625
Lhotse Shar Nepal Asia 8400 27559
Cho Oyu China, Nepal Asia 8201 26906
2006-07-06 19:19:43 · answer #5 · answered by Eli 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily. Just because there may be another peak that would be available, does not mean it can't be true. There are many peaks but where does it ever say he landed on the highest one? The one landed on is named but that does not mean it was the highest, nor the only one that could have been chosen.
2006-07-06 19:21:22 · answer #6 · answered by ramall1to 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Er.. no. He was nowhere near mt. Everest. He happened to spot the highest bit of land he was near.
2006-07-06 19:20:39 · answer #7 · answered by PsiKnight9 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no, if he happened to be floating over Alaska when the waters receded, he would land on the highest peak beneath him, not get transported around the world.
2006-07-06 19:20:35 · answer #8 · answered by rosends 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nope
2006-07-08 06:22:44 · answer #9 · answered by Songbird1979 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
maybe he did and mont ararat in turkey was just named that in honor of the real mount ararat some scholars say they found evidence that the ark landed in the mountains of northern iran instead of the traditionly mountain of ararat in modern day turkey
2006-07-06 19:20:28 · answer #10 · answered by abramelin_the_wise_mage 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yeah, and Noah had an ark big enough to hold EVERY SINGLE species of animal, bird, insect, etc. ... hahahaha .... it's just a fable
2006-07-06 19:19:45 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋