Noah's Ark Replica

[Tired of the Nonsense]

Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.




Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?

Does anyone foresee any problems here?

[Bust Nak]

If you look back, I didn't address the point about the air density at all; I already knew from study that the ark would float and theoretically hold the animals assigned to it so those were the points I addressed.

I'm happy to hear both sides of the argument and learn where I can, if I don't know the answer to something I will say so - nobody can know everything. If I think I know I will say what I understand and listen to the counter arguments to see if I find them convincing; if I feel I have been mistaken I have no problem at all with saying so.

Hope that answers your question.

Not quite, here is an analogy, if a flat Earther posted an argument for a flat Earth, one that is not immediately/obviously faulty, I would feel the need to do the research necessarily to debunk it; at the same time, I would not be comfortable voicing support for a globe Earth until I felt the point have been adequately dealt with, no matter how sure I am of a globe Earth.

Don't you feel the same way with Noah's Ark? It's one thing to not have an answer to every counter-argument, it's quite another to defend a position while knowing there is a seemingly sound counter-argument against that position.

[JehovahsWitness]

It's one thing to not have an answer to every counter-argument, it's quite another to defend a position while knowing there is a seemingly sound counter-argument against that position.

Firstly I don't feel the need to "debunk" anyone, it's people's right to believe as they choose. If in the course of my ministry someone raised an objection to what *I* believe I will explain the reasons for my faith to the best of my ability. If they are unconvinced, then I am perfectly happy with that. Secondly, I don't feel that there are any sound counterarguments agains the bible, and in the particular topic at hand, the flood. There may be questions I cannot personally answer, or even questions that I believe the answer is simply not availabe at the present time, that's not the same thing as believing there are "sound counter-arguments against the position" or that the event didn't happen.

To illustrate: Imagine a man is convinced his house has burnt down because he is standing and looking at that charred remains of where it used to be. What if he was asked "Do you know when, how and for what reason your house was burnt?" and the man answered "No, I cannot answer those questions at the present time. Do you think that because of that he would therefore doubt the house was burnt? What if someone told him that it has been scientifically proven (and all the most intelligent people in the world have concluded) that the material his house was made of cannot burn? how "convincing [an] argument do you think he would consider that?

I have absolute faith and an unshakable confidence in the bible narrative, for me it's like having first hand experience of the facts; there may be counter-arguments but none of them are, in my opinion "sound".


JW

[Hawkins]

Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.




Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?

Does anyone foresee any problems here?

God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.

It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is. In revelation it is said that there is "no sea" in the New Heaven and New Earth. in Isaiah it is said that lions won't bite in that new world. So it is very possible that whatever species Noah can catch will be the only species one can still see in the New Heaven and New Earth, living along with other species created not in our current world.

[Kenisaw]

Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.




Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?

Does anyone foresee any problems here?

God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.

It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is. In revelation it is said that there is "no sea" in the New Heaven and New Earth. in Isaiah it is said that lions won't bite in that new world. So it is very possible that whatever species Noah can catch will be the only species one can still see in the New Heaven and New Earth, living along with other species created not in our current world.

I'm lost. Are you saying there were animals created after the flood?

[rikuoamero]

Johan's Ark: Noah's Ark Replica Crashes Into Moored Norwegian Coast Guard Vessel, Officials Say
The crash occurred in Oslo, Norway, Friday. A military patrol boat and the 230-foot long replica created by Dutch carpenter Johan Huibers, who reportedly used the Bible's measurements, were damaged.




Two of every species of animal in the entire world and all of the food necessary to feed and maintain them all for months was going to fit into that? REALLY?

Does anyone foresee any problems here?

God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.

It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is. In revelation it is said that there is "no sea" in the New Heaven and New Earth. in Isaiah it is said that lions won't bite in that new world. So it is very possible that whatever species Noah can catch will be the only species one can still see in the New Heaven and New Earth, living along with other species created not in our current world.

I'm lost. Are you saying there were animals created after the flood?

It seems that the person you replied to hasn't thought through the logical implications of what they wrote. If God just poofed more animals into existence after the flood this just means the flood was completely and utterly pointless.

[Zzyzx]

.

God doesn't need those animal samples to re-spawn the world He created in the first place. He didn't even ask Noah to catch the fishes.

It is rather a test of faith for the righteous Noah to show how obedient he is.

WOW, just WOW -- a proposal that "God" killed off the entire human population and all animals except those aboard the ark to test the faith and obedience of Noah

This is a prime example of the ridiculous lengths to which Apologists will go in attempting to "explain" ancient myths upon which their belief system is based.

Incredible.

Thank you for demonstrating to readers the validity of religious pronouncements.

[Bust Nak]

[Replying to post 52 by JehovahsWitness]

So the air pressure being so thin that Noah couldn't breath, that it would be so cold, well below the freezing point of water, (before you knew the science behind those claims doesn't work) didn't seem like sound counterarguments against the Ark? How could Noah's Ark possibly be true, if he and his animals couldn't breath and were frozen?

I would guess that my conviction that the world couldn't possibly be flat, is on par with your conviction that the Bible is true. But it still bother me lots when a flat Earther present something that isn't immediately false, enough to make me google locations of cities, draw the diagrams, do the math. The debunking isn't about convincing that flat Earther. Often times I wouldn't even post the resulting "debunking" after I've done my work, because I don't need him to believe in a globe. It's about being convincing myself, I need to be satisfied that my model of the Earth is consistent with reality.

In the same way I imagine I would be bothered by a seemingly reasonable case by a scientist that the material in my house is 100% flame proof after my house has burnt down. I need to find out why the scientist is wrong, even when I have 100% proof that he is wrong. And you can bet someone worthy of the label "scientist" would feel the same way, the guy presenting the fire proof case to me would be just as interested in finding out what's wrong.

You don't feel that same need?

Or perhaps I've overestimated my conviction against the flat Earth? Had my conviction been as strong as yours I wouldn't feel the need to research flat Earther claims?

[JehovahsWitness]

So the air pressure being so thin that Noah couldn't breath, that it would be so cold, well below the freezing point of water, (before you knew the science behind those claims doesn't work) didn't seem like sound counterarguments against the Ark? How could Noah's Ark possibly be true, if he and his animals couldn't breath and were frozen?

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I believe in an omnipotent God. At least intellectually you must be able to grasp that people that believe in an omnipotent God have different paremeters about what is possible and impossible. You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances. At least intellectually you must be able to see the flaws in that position.

Listen I'm not here to convince you of anything and I'm sure you're not here to preach to me (ie change my beliefs), I appreciate the information you provided, but its still just widow decoration, pretty and interesting but nothing more. I don't go through life bothered in any way what so ever by what people do or don't believe. I'm happy to share my take on things but if I meet someone that believes their dentist is a 6foot pink rabbit from the planet Zorf, I'll not lose sleep over it.

Nothing personal and absolutely no offense intended.

JW

[Zzyzx]

.

Maybe I wasn't clear enough, I believe in an omnipotent God. At least intellectually you must be able to grasp that people that believe in an omnipotent God have different paremeters about what is possible and impossible.

When one believes in an omnipotent god ANYTHING is possible in their imagination. However, that extends only to them and not to anyone else and not to the real world we inhabit.

You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances. At least intellectually you must be able to see the flaws in that position.

If one accepts the hypothetical omnipotent god they can accept whatever the tale tells or whatever they make up.

However, if one does not accept the claim of omnipotent god they are not obligated to debate with that assumption. In that case, much / most / all of the tale is questionable (at best).

Listen I'm not here to convince you of anything and I'm sure you're not here to preach to me (ie change my beliefs),

Thank you.

I appreciate the information you provided, but its still just widow decoration, pretty and interesting but nothing more.

Of course, anyone is free to disregard information provided. However, doing so indicates or suggests an agenda of maintaining one's beliefs in spite of contradicting evidence.

A term for that condition is willful ignorance

I don't go through life bothered in any way what so ever by what people do or don't believe. I'm happy to share my take on things but if I meet someone that believes their dentist is a 6foot pink rabbit from the planet Zorf, I'll not lose sleep over it.

Same here

Nothing personal and absolutely no offense intended.

Ditto

[rikuoamero]

[Replying to post 58 by JehovahsWitness]

You are essentially arguing, an omnipotent God cannot have kept Noah and the animals alive under certain circumstances.

What you've done here is removed the concept of Noah's Flood and the ark away from falsifiability. If you allow for God to have kept Noah and the animals safe, despite all the dangers of a flood, then the same logic applies to any claim one cares to make.