I think i heard a long time ago, that there were three kangaroos on the ark, because they used the pouch to hide the baby. Anyone else heard this? Or maybe i'm mixed up
2006-10-26 23:38:56 · 18 answers · asked by skorpi_ru 2 in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Haven't heard that one but I do know according to the Bible more than 2 of some animals were taken and also, they would have come docilely onto the arc, as God did not make them afraid of man until after the Flood (also in the bible).
2006-10-26 23:42:38 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well if there was an Ark it would not have been able to hold 2 of every animal, man can also prove that there is not enough water on the earth as far as rain goes to flood the earth, and we can prove that the ice caps did not melt at this time, I believe that the only a small part of world flooded, think about it, do you really think that a flood wiped out man? and we had to start all over again, what this story is all about is what some man has written many years ago, with no understanding of the size of the world, and when the floods came his world as far as he could see,or travel was flooded, not the whole planet.
2006-10-27 00:01:08 · answer #2 · answered by ringo711 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hmmm, if he took 2 of every animal (7 of every kosher animal apparently), what about armadilloes, emus, aardvarks, polar bears. I don't reckon the ark was ocean going.
Also, what about bacteria and viruses. Do we blame him for permitting the survival of the syphilis bacterium, to say nothing of typhoid, typhus, leprosy etc.? He must have had a wonderful bacterial and viral research laboratory with him. Woinder what model of electron microscope he used to identify the viruses!
Worse, if only the creatures in the ark survived, what about diseases like AIDS - caused by a virus that didn't exist then? ah! evolution, of course. Why didn't we all think of that.
BtW, maybe the ark was really a TARDIS :-) That would account for the vast number of animals in it.
2006-10-27 00:30:56 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I've never heard of that, but its just the same as to say that one of the pairs had its female pregnant, right?
Noah may have been decieved by the appearances, but I think that God would know the truth on both cases. Remeber (if you believe) that God himself brought the animals to the ark, and He wouldn't have made such a mistake! He said a pair of every species, and a pair it was.
2006-10-26 23:47:52 · answer #4 · answered by OverClocked 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's a pity Noah's not still around really. Making something so huge that it'd hold several million species of animals (more if we include insects) collect them all in a short space of time...
If he were here today the international space station would be a breeze by comparison, and we'd all be living on the moon as well in big domes. Oh wait, that was another novel I read...
2006-10-26 23:46:45 · answer #5 · answered by nert 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
as a point of interest there is no mention of animals going in two by two, that misconception has come about because of a silly song, noah was told to choose male and female animals, and the individual number may have been 4-5 of each.
2006-10-26 23:47:42 · answer #6 · answered by Sentinel 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't know.I guess I will have to get a kangaroo and get inside and see if I am noticed in there.
2006-10-26 23:43:57 · answer #7 · answered by EasterBunny 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That may have been in a Little Golden Book, like The Pokey Little Puppy or something like that. :)
2006-10-26 23:45:46 · answer #8 · answered by nancy jo 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Kangaroos are bouncy.
2006-10-26 23:53:05 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
There was no ark. It's a silly children's story.
2006-10-27 02:35:17 · answer #10 · answered by Daniel R 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋