I believe the Bible is the word of God and I have faith that the Lord can do whatever He wants. Who are we to say that God could not do this?
2007-10-06 20:15:29 · 21 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture ➔ Religion & Spirituality
Logically I believe
2007-10-06 20:20:24 · answer #1 · answered by pestie58 the spider hunter 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
That much water had to come from somewhere. It only had three possible sources: the sky, the ground, and space.
Water has weight. The air pressure fluctuates as clouds pass over head. If the flood water came from the sky, the air pressure before it fell would have been over 800 times what it is now. Not even nuclear submarines can withstand that.
Water underground is hot. It is released from hot springs, geysers, and volcanoes. If the flood water came from underground, it would have been as hot as the magma released in a volcanic explosion. Noah should have been instantly boiled alive.
Objects in space release huge amounts of energy upon impacting earth. If the flood water came from comets in space, the destruction would have been millions of times worse than anything shown in a sci-fi move.
The only other possibility would be that the water didn't come from anywhere. God simply snapped his fingers and it magically appeared. But if God can magically make things appear, he can also magically make things disappear. Forcing all of humanity to suffer through the experience of drowning when he could have instead painlessly willed them out of existence would prove that God is sadistically immoral. Such a being should not be worshiped, no matter how many ancient books tell you to do so.
2007-10-07 03:29:27 · answer #2 · answered by scifiguy 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Noah would only need to have about 16,000 individual animals on board. Only about 11% would have been much larger than a sheep. The ark was about 1.54 million cubic feet which is the same volume as 522 standard American railroad stock cars each of which can hold 240 sheep. Food would take up about 15% of the ark's volume. Drinking water would take up about 9.4%--less if they used rain water.
Also, if all the mountains and oceans in the world were leveled out, there would be MORE than enough water to cover the whole earth. Before the flood, mountains were not as tall and seas were not as deep. If it was just a local flood why would they need to take birds on board?
And where did I come up with all that?:) Follow the link below.
2007-10-07 04:03:12 · answer #3 · answered by jubka1 2 · 1⤊ 1⤋
No I don't.
If God can do whatever he wants, why didn't he simply snap his fingers and start again?
He could have instantly changed everything back to fit with his original plan, but instead he chose to murder everyone on the face of this planet. Does that really seem like something an omni-benevolent entity would do?
That's not to mention the dozens of scientific reasons that show that a global flood never occurred.
2007-10-07 03:30:31 · answer #4 · answered by Anthony Stark 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The story of Noah's Ark is one of the most nonsensical and far-fetched stories in a collection of fraire tales called the bible.
2007-10-07 03:44:03 · answer #5 · answered by ndmagicman 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Yes - I do but not like the bible says. There was defiantly a flood and possible some guy built a very large ship to save his animals. BUT only a hand full and the flood was not world wide
2007-10-07 04:09:15 · answer #6 · answered by Freethinking Liberal 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
A population cannot originate from two individuals of a species; inbreeding would soon result in genetic abnormalities and result in the (fairly rapid) extinction of the incipient population.
So no, the Noah's Ark story could not have occurred as described.
And not to mention the size of a vessel that would be able to carry two of every species - it would dwarf a modern nuclear aircraft carrier. Was the technology to build such a vessel available in biblical times?
2007-10-07 03:21:52 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
There are many middle eastern versions of the flood story. I have little doubt there was a catastrophic flood in the area, but myths have always been a powerful tool for captivating audiences for the purpose of teaching morality.
Perhaps the Bible is a spiritual manual rather than an encyclopedia.
2007-10-07 03:21:29 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
Logically - no.
But metaphorically.... sure...
I think it kind of defeats the whole point of faith when people try to "prove" their religions.
There are so many... er... holes in that story that it doesn't hold water... so to speak.
How did two of EVERY animal fit on one boat... do you have any idea of what size that is??? That's like a boat the size of Texas!
Not to mention the fact that they would have to be fed for 40 days and nights... where was the food kept?
Why didn't the animals eat each other?
Why did the Raven never return but we still have Ravens to this day?
The dove returned but not the Raven, you know...
2007-10-07 03:18:30 · answer #9 · answered by rabble rouser 6 · 1⤊ 3⤋
No, I don't. It is implausible in the extreme, and seems only an attempt to explain why there are fossils. (All those animals died in the flood.) People have been pointing out the inconsistency of it for centuries, but the simple explanation is that there is no evidence in favor of such a hypothesis.
2007-10-07 03:20:45 · answer #10 · answered by auntb93 7 · 5⤊ 1⤋
Yes I do believe it. I believe God came to earth through a virgin birth, made water turn to wine. Raised a dead man, made the blind see, and died for the sins of the world. Why should we be amazed that he put animals on a boat?
2007-10-07 03:22:46 · answer #11 · answered by Anonymous · 3⤊ 3⤋