English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

and then properly redistribute them so that the marsupials ended up in Australia and so forth

please state facts, this is a question for those read the bible "literally"

2007-10-05 14:35:32 · 17 answers · asked by Follow The 9 2 in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

displaying the true knowledge of a christian

definition of ark

1. (sometimes initial capital letter) Also called Noah's Ark. the large boat built by Noah in which he saved himself, his family, and a pair of every kind of creature during the Flood. Gen. 6–9.

www.dictionary.com

2007-10-05 14:42:02 · update #1

what passage was this to be exact?

2007-10-05 14:42:39 · update #2

I believe C.L. stated "4,400 years ago the oceans weren't salty" i'm not sure, I will search my old questions

2007-10-05 14:44:14 · update #3

17 answers

he didnt its fantasy

and isnt syphilis and bacteria and germs living things wouldnt he and his family have to carry these germs and diseases

2007-10-05 14:39:47 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1 2

Well, for those who read the bible "literally" Noah didn't take all the animals on the ark. There is a passage that states something like 6 pairs clean animals and 7 dirty, 7 pairs of clean birds and so on. I forgot how many, but it was like 100 and something all together.

2007-10-05 21:41:21 · answer #2 · answered by punch 7 · 1 0

There weren't 10 billion. They all evolved from a few in 6000 years. As the ark sailed around the world Noah tossed some out on every little island he could find. The cat and duck ended up in Australia and made a ......

2007-10-05 21:44:10 · answer #3 · answered by Lionheart ® 7 · 1 0

The story is based on Jewish mythology and folklore. The event did happen but it was probably limited to the area.

The Bible was written by many, many different human authors over a period of approximately 1500 years. These human authors were inspired by God, that is, God breathed ideas into them, which He wanted expressed, and they expressed these ideas in their own way. It was not their intention to write a book that would be entered into "The Bible," as we know it. The whole thrust was to preserve the traditions of how God dealt with His people.

Since the Bible is not one book, but a library of books, there are many different kinds of writing in these books, e.g., prose, proverbs, parables, prophecy, prayers, poetry, (narrative hymns), legends, legal documents, letters, sermons, songs, stories, etc. This is called Literary Form.

In order to be able to understand a passage of the Bible one must be aware of:
1. In what form it was written, e.g., prose, poetry, history, etc. (Literary Form)
2. Why it was written.
3. When it was written.
4. What is the whole book about?
5. What is the meaning of each word?

How does it fit in with other parts of the Bible on the same subject?


The "Dogmatic Constitution on Divine Revelation" (Vat. 11, Ch. 3.11) of the Catholic Church says that "all that the inspired, or sacred writers, affirm should be regarded as affirmed by the Holy Spirit, we must acknowledge that the books of Scripture firmly, and without error, teach that truth which God, for the sake of our salvation, wished to be confided to the sacred Scriptures." This is the Church's teaching on the matter after twenty centuries of Christian discernment.

Biblical inerrancy, then, is the Bible's privilege of never teaching error. Does this mean that every statement in the Bible is divine teaching? Of course not. The Bible does not always teach. There are many statements in its various books that are there for historical, geographical, poetic or other reasons. However, whenever a biblical author intends to teach us something, then the Holy Spirit intends that too. Everything that the Bible teaches is without error, but everything in the Bible is not meant as teaching. Each author was left free by the Lord to express himself according to the ideas of his own day. Exegesis (interpretation) is the science whereby scholars determine the correct interpretation of the text. The Bible is unique, for it is the word of God coming to us in the words of men. Therefore, biblical exegesis demands that we find out what both the human author and the Holy Spirit are trying to say.

True exegesis is Fides quaerens intellectum, which means that faith seeks understanding. So the seeker must approach the Word from the point of faith and love, for the inspired writers communicated the Word in the language of faith and love. To refuse to do this is to have the Bible remain closed to us, even if we can write a literary analysis of every book in it.

The advantages of the Catholic approach are two: First, the inspiration is really proved, not just "felt." Second, the main fact behind the proof—the reality of an infallible, teaching Church—leads one naturally to an answer to the problem that troubled the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:30-31): How is one to know which interpretations are correct? The same Church that authenticates the Bible, that attests to its inspiration, is the authority established by Christ to interpret his word.


Sources:

scborromeo.org
.
Catechism of the Catholic Church

Frances Hogan
Can you trust the Bible?

catholic.com/library

2007-10-05 21:44:50 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

#1 the Ark was huge .It was built in 24 inch Royal Cubits not 18 inch profane cubits.He took the base species of every animal .The animals were babies.The fish and sea animals stayed there.Everything else mutated and evolved to adapt to it's environment later. After Peleg(when the earth was divide by continental drift ) the marsupials adapted as did the Australian Aborigines.The Artic Fox turned white,the desrt fox turn grey/brown.The felines of the jungles developed stripes or spots,the plains cats turned savannah brown. Get it?

2007-10-05 21:44:17 · answer #5 · answered by AngelsFan 6 · 0 2

He didn't.
Some were collected in twos others were taken as 7, two pairs and 1 male for sacrifice later.
As the animals spread across the earth they developed into the variety's of species we have today.
Just like mankind, we came from 3 nationality's and threw intermarriage we have a very large variety of humans today.

2007-10-05 21:48:41 · answer #6 · answered by Here I Am 7 · 1 2

With God all things are possible, and plus the continents for what we know was in one land piece. Science has not proved anything about the continents alwyas being seperated OR being together.

2007-10-05 22:13:17 · answer #7 · answered by travsbest 3 · 0 0

Look, everyone knows that Eucalyptus grew legs and walked to the Middle East with the Koalas.

Otherwise, Koalas would have starved to death. And what would our world be like without the Australian version of rabies-infested possums?

2007-10-05 21:41:42 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Just throwing crazy stuff out there...

Could it be that Noah didn't have 10 billion species on board, but had maybe 100 species which evolved into today's 10 billion?

Of course, that wouldn't be a literal reading of Scripture. Sorry!

2007-10-05 21:41:25 · answer #9 · answered by Keep On Trucking 4 · 1 3

Now come'on...there are possums in the Americas aren't there? When the Kangaroos saw them they figured " there goes the neighborhood" and left for the suburbs.

2007-10-05 21:48:39 · answer #10 · answered by charlie the 2na 3 · 2 0

well, figure some of those animals he didn't have to bring aboard. The sea creatures didn't have to go on. And the birdsd and insects probably took turns sitting. And every animal we have now, some didn't exist then. (evolution, remember?)
where they all were supposed to go, well, noah probably just dumped them wherever.

2007-10-05 21:48:34 · answer #11 · answered by Chief High Commander, UAN 5 · 0 2

fedest.com, questions and answers