Evidence for God from Science

Why hasn't anyone found Noah's Ark? Did they take it apart to build houses after they landed or what? ..........didnt it land on a mountain? Maybe that mountain is currently under ocean water......

and also, could God be hiding it from us? Finding the Ark would definitely be a blow to athiests and other religions...........but that would probably mess up "The Plan"

This is an extract from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... n-culture/

"If you just got off the ark, and there's no trees, what are you going to build your house out of? You've got a huge boat made of wood, so let's use that," he said. "So I think it got torn apart and scavenged for building material basically."


I have found at least 2-3 articles on google search.

Dan

Didn't they use the wood from the ark, to build riding stables for the T-Rexes?

RickD wrote:Didn't they use the wood from the ark, to build riding stables for the T-Rexes?

Jeepers i feel sorry for the guy that had to muck out those stables.

RickD wrote:Didn't they use the wood from the ark, to build riding stables for the T-Rexes?

They were not stables Rick, those camps had one purpose - to tear their arms off.

Danieltwotwenty wrote:This is an extract from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news ... n-culture/

"If you just got off the ark, and there's no trees, what are you going to build your house out of? You've got a huge boat made of wood, so let's use that," he said. "So I think it got torn apart and scavenged for building material basically."


I have found at least 2-3 articles on google search.

Dan

Yep. That makes sense.

Actually I don't really buy the "they tore it apart and built houses." I might be wrong, but I thought Noah and his family moved down from the mountains, built a vineyard, and repopulated the Earth somehow afterward. Presuming they didn't defy the weather and build a vineyard in the frozen mountains, I don't think that wood was used to build their houses (unless they carried it for hundreds of miles afterward).

Ivellious wrote:Actually I don't really buy the "they tore it apart and built houses." I might be wrong, but I thought Noah and his family moved down from the mountains, built a vineyard, and repopulated the Earth somehow afterward. Presuming they didn't defy the weather and build a vineyard in the frozen mountains, I don't think that wood was used to build their houses (unless they carried it for hundreds of miles afterward).

When they built the pyramids the stone blocks were dragged for many miles.

Yeah, but "they" in the case of the Egyptians were thousands of enslaved workers...Noah had what, 4 guys and 4 women? Not quite the same as an enslaved army.

The pyramids were probably built by volunteers not slaves. You got a point about the amount of people still. Good to know.

This is one story in the Bible that I take some issue with for numerous reasons. The logistics of the story are just too sketchy for my tastes. If anything, I think it falls under the category of Bible stories that I personally think are just extended metaphors. Either that or it was just put in there to serve a moral purpose, not a literal one. Some think it's blasphemous to take the Bible as anything but literal, though.

Sorry about the slave bit, I should have known better.

Ivellious wrote:This is one story in the Bible that I take some issue with for numerous reasons. The logistics of the story are just too sketchy for my tastes. If anything, I think it falls under the category of Bible stories that I personally think are just extended metaphors. Either that or it was just put in there to serve a moral purpose, not a literal one. Some think it's blasphemous to take the Bible as anything but literal, though.

Sorry about the slave bit, I should have known better.

I take the Bible literally it is just my interpretation is different, I think the flood was more likely to be local, the boat would not have to be so big and could easily be dismantled. Don't forget also this wasn't just him and his immediate family it also included his extended family, I am not sure of the exact numbers but it would have been more than four people I am sure.

You seem to be more taking an issue with the idea of a global flood.

Ivellious wrote:Yeah, but "they" in the case of the Egyptians were thousands of enslaved workers...Noah had what, 4 guys and 4 women? Not quite the same as an enslaved army.

My point was if there is a need for something there is a way of doing it, how do you think we came to where we are now. For all I know they could have had a big bon fire the night they left it and sang praises to God through the night, all we can do is speculate.

My only problem with what you say is this: You say you take the Bible literally. However, you do not, you interpret the Bible using your own non-faith based rationality. For instance, the Bible literally states that the entire Earth was flooded by God, no exceptions. The Bible literally states that Noah and his 3 sons and their collective 4 wives were the only humans saved. They were also each several hundred years old, at least. Of course, rationally and logistically speaking, it doesn't make a ton of sense (those points and numerous other ones). I'm assuming that's why you interpret the story differently.

The problem comes in when Christians say that the Bible is ultimately perfect and pure, and do in fact take many Bible verses literally. But, the inconsistency rolls in on certain parts (say, the story of Noah's Ark). How do we as imperfect humans get to pick and choose which verses are literal and which are metaphorical or greatly embellished?