Noah's Ark?

[redneck22]

Does anybody else find this extremly haard to believe,im not doubting it,just need some opnions,the fact that noah built a ship big enough for all those animals

The animals need not have been full grown, they would eat less as juniors. All dinosaur eggs that have been found are about the size of Ostrich eggs, so their juniors would not be big in the first year on the Ark.

,how could noah collect all the animals from the whole land,

It is written that God brought them.

there wasnt enough water to cover the earth at this time

Genesis1:2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

and

Genesis1:9 God also said: Let the waters that are under the heaven, be gathered together into one place: and let the dry land appear. And it was so done.

So it was no problem covering the earth with water since that was how it was created in the first place. If you got a big bulldozer today and shovel all the mountains, land etc into the oceans, melt all the ice caps etc so that the earth would a perfect ball, how deep would the water be that would cover the earth??? …anyone…anyone…FERRIS.

 

[Third_Day]

Why is it so important for you to believe that a global flood actually occurred? Most scientists and Catholic theologians disagree with this interpretation.

It proves that the bible is without error. Scripture says the entire earth was covered, all flesh upon the earth died not just the flesh that was in a small part of the earth. A massive global flood that lasted over a year with earthquakes and powerful winds can explain wyh fossils are found in graveyards and how places like the Grand Canyon were formed not over millions of years but is a short span of time.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

It proves that the bible is without error. Scripture says the entire earth was covered, all flesh upon the earth died not just the flesh that was in a small part of the earth. A massive global flood that lasted over a year with earthquakes and powerful winds can explain wyh fossils are found in graveyards and how places like the Grand Canyon were formed not over millions of years but is a short span of time.

So are you a geocentrist as well? Because the Bible says in many places that the Earth is motionless and at the center of the universe.

 

[Third_Day]

So are you a geocentrist as well? Because the Bible says in many places that the Earth is motionless and at the center of the universe.

Absolutely. Why would I believe in a theory? No scientific experiment has ever proven heliocentrism. The Church has never recanted its condemnation of Galileo. The book *Galileo Was Wrong the Church Was Right * lays out the case for geocentrism in my opinion

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Absolutely. Why would I believe in a theory? No scientific experiment has ever proven heliocentrism. The Church has never recanted its condemnation of Galileo. The book *Galileo Was Wrong the Church Was Right * lays out the case for geocentrism in my opinion

Oh, so you’re one of those “The Earth is 6000 years old, there is no evolution people?”
Why would you believe in a theory? Gravity is only a theory too ya know

 

[Faith1960]

Oh, so you’re one of those “The Earth is 6000 years old, there is no evolution people?”
Why would you believe in a theory? Gravity is only a theory too ya know

 

[dranzal]

Well, Jesus seems to think Noah and his boat were real:

Mt 24: For as it was in the days of Noah, so it will be at the coming of the Son of Man. 38 In (those) days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, up to the day that Noah entered the ark. 39 They did not know until the flood came and carried them all away. So will it be (also) at the coming of the Son of Man.

 

[buffalo]

The animals need not have been full grown, they would eat less as juniors. All dinosaur eggs that have been found are about the size of Ostrich eggs, so their juniors would not be big in the first year on the Ark.

It is written that God brought them.

Genesis1:2 And the earth was void and empty, and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the spirit of God moved over the waters.

and

Genesis1:9 God also said: Let the waters that are under the heaven, be gathered together into one place: and let the dry land appear. And it was so done.

So it was no problem covering the earth with water since that was how it was created in the first place. If you got a big bulldozer today and shovel all the mountains, land etc into the oceans, melt all the ice caps etc so that the earth would a perfect ball, how deep would the water be that would cover the earth??? …anyone…anyone…FERRIS.

about 9000 feet.

 

[Third_Day]

Oh, so you’re one of those “The Earth is 6000 years old, there is no evolution people?”
Why would you believe in a theory? Gravity is only a theory too ya know

I can experience gravity even thouth no one understands it. There is no proof of evolution or an ancient universe. I suppose you believe in the big bang even though there is no evidence of such an event.
Which “theory” of the moon do you hold or have you ever thought about it?. Science presents 4 theories on the origin of the moon. Here they are from evolutionist and scientist G. Brent Dalyrymple:
The fission hypothesis: The Moon is presumed to have separated from the earth because of the rapid rotation of the earth and the earth threw off a large “droplet” that solidified in orbit and became the Moon.

The capture hypothesis: The Moon formed elsewhere and was captured by gravity when it passed near the Earth.

The double-planet hypothesis: The Moon and Earth formed together as a planetary pair.

The collision hypothesis: The Moon was formed when a large body, perhaps the sixe of Mars or Mercury collided with earth and material was ejected into orbit by the impact where over time it formed into our Moon.

According to Dalrymple the collision hypothesis is currently favored among scientists.

To which theory do you hold?

I hold to one not even considered by scientists. God made the earth and the moon and placed them exactly where they are.

Here is a question for you. Let’s say that tomorrow Pope Bendict issued an ex-cathedra decree that scripture is without error in matters of faith, morals and science. The earth does not move. It is the center of the universe. Creation occured in six literal days.
Would you accept that infallible decree without hesitation or would you immediately think that the Pope has erred? Would you begin to question the doctrine of infallibility?The outcry from the secular media would be deafing. Catholics would be ridiculed as living in the middle ages. What would such a decree do to your faith?

 

[Thoughtfulone]

I can experience gravity even thouth no one understands it. There is no proof of evolution or an ancient universe. I suppose you believe in the big bang even though there is no evidence of such an event.
Which “theory” of the moon do you hold or have you ever thought about it?. Science presents 4 theories on the origin of the moon. Here they are from evolutionist and scientist G. Brent Dalyrymple:
The fission hypothesis: The Moon is presumed to have separated from the earth because of the rapid rotation of the earth and the earth threw off a large “droplet” that solidified in orbit and became the Moon.

The capture hypothesis: The Moon formed elsewhere and was captured by gravity when it passed near the Earth.

The double-planet hypothesis: The Moon and Earth formed together as a planetary pair.

The collision hypothesis: The Moon was formed when a large body, perhaps the sixe of Mars or Mercury collided with earth and material was ejected into orbit by the impact where over time it formed into our Moon.

According to Dalrymple the collision hypothesis is currently favored among scientists.

To which theory do you hold?

I hold to one not even considered by scientists. God made the earth and the moon and placed them exactly where they are.

Here is a question for you. Let’s say that tomorrow Pope Bendict issued an ex-cathedra decree that scripture is without error in matters of faith, morals and science. The earth does not move. It is the center of the universe. Creation occured in six literal days.
Would you accept that infallible decree without hesitation or would you immediately think that the Pope has erred? Would you begin to question the doctrine of infallibility?The outcry from the secular media would be deafing. Catholics would be ridiculed as living in the middle ages. What would such a decree do to your faith?

I have no opinion on the formation of the moon. I leave that to the scientists. There is no reason whatsoever to take the Bible so literally. People wrote and spoke allegorically in those days. Jesus did it all the time. And if the Pope came out and said something like that? Well, that would be interesting, and I would have some serious questions and doubts. What would you do if the Pope came out and said “infallibly” that every woman with more than 2 children must abort any subsequent pregnancies? Would you blindly follow along with this, or would you use your own conscience and reason, formed in God’s image, to discern right from wrong for yourself?

 

[Third_Day]

=Thoughtfulone;7688350]I have no opinion on the formation of the moon. I leave that to the scientists.

The scientists can’t even agree on how the moon came into existance. Why should I trust them when they pretend to have all the answers concerning the cosmos?

There is no reason whatsoever to take the Bible so literally. People wrote and spoke allegorically in those days. Jesus did it all the time.

But it is a teaching of the Church to take the bible literally unless " where reason makes it untenable or necessity requires."
Peter and Jesus both spoke about the flood. Why would you take them as speaking allegorically? Jesus said that God created humans “from the beginning male and female”. How do you fit evolution into that?

And if the Pope came out and said something like that? Well, that would be interesting, and I would have some serious questions and doubts.

This is why your position is dangerous. You have made science your infallible god. Your beliefs on creation are all based on unprovable theories and should the Church define infalliblly what has always been believed you could lose your faith.
I believe that as secularism continues to grow and science becomes god, the Church will one day infallibly define how the universe was created. If it goes against what I now believe, I can immediatley accept that scripture is not a science book but if it goes against what you believe, you may lose your faith because you will be ridiculed by the secular society and you will have to decide if you are willing to be persecuted for holding that the Church is infallible.

Many scientists claim that homosexuals are born with that inclination. St. Paul calls homosexuality “unnatural.” What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? Will you side with science or scripture and the Church?

What would you do if the Pope came out and said “infallibly” that every woman with more than 2 children must abort any subsequent pregnancies? Would you blindly follow along with this, or would you use your own conscience and reason, formed in God’s image, to discern right from wrong for yourself?

The Church has always taught that abortion is morally wrong so the Pope could never go against that teaching. The Church has no defined teaching on creation although the concensus of the Church Fathers was a literal six days where the earth was created before the sun and moon and that rules out the big bang theory.

 

[redneck22]

Originally Posted by **redneck22 **

So it was no problem covering the earth with water since that was how it was created in the first place. If you got a big bulldozer today and shovel all the mountains, land etc into the oceans, melt all the ice caps etc so that the earth would a perfect ball, how deep would the water be that would cover the earth??? …anyone… …anyone… … …FERRIS.

about 9000 feet.

…is the correct answer.

Thank you Buffalo for taking the challenge and demonstrating there was plenty of water for Noah’s flood.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

The scientists can’t even agree on how the moon came into existance. Why should I trust them when they pretend to have all the answers concerning the cosmos?

Because just like I trust my doctor to diagnose an illness, or my roofer to fix my roof, it only makes sense to defer to people who have studied the matter at hand unless I have a better idea of what happened. The bottom line is that geocentrism doesn’t make any sense. and everything we have learned from scientific observation points to heliocentrism.

But it is a teaching of the Church to take the bible literally

I’m sure the Church fathers believed a lot of things about the world and nature that turned out not to be true. They were theologians, not scientists

 

[Third_Day]

=Thoughtfulone;7691237]Because just like I trust my doctor to diagnose an illness, or my roofer to fix my roof, it only makes sense to defer to people who have studied the matter at hand unless I have a better idea of what happened.

Science can only speculate on what happenned.

The bottom line is that geocentrism doesn’t make any sense. and everything we have learned from scientific observation points to heliocentrism

No scientific observation points exclusively to heliocentrism. Even Einstein admitted that:

"Either coordinate system could be used with equal justification. The two sentences: “The sun is at rest and the earth moves, “or “the sun moves and the earth is at rest,” would simply mean two different conventions concerning two different coordinate systems” The Evolution of Physics Albert Einstein and Leopold Infeld.

“When two theories are available and both are compatible with the given arsenal of facts, then there are no other criteria to prefer one over the other except the intuition of the researcher. Therefore one can understand why intelligent scientists, cognizant both of theories and facts, can still be passionate adherents of opposing theories.” Induction and Deduction in Physics.

There is nothing that Jesus said that goes against evolution…even the Church has said as much.

The Church has never promoted evolution. Can you show me where?

If the Church starts “infallibly” claiming things that are directly controvertible by observable empirical data, then we have a problem

Observable data? Who has ever observed evolution? Who observed the big bang?

I’m sure the Church fathers believed a lot of things about the world and nature that turned out not to be true. They were theologians, not scientists

What did the Church Father believe that did not turn out to be “true?” You are believing in theories not infallible truth

Many scientists claim that homosexuals are born with that inclination. St. Paul calls homosexuality “unnatural.” What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? Will you side with your science god or scripture and the Church?

 

[utah_rose]

Actually, an engineer scrupulously went over the plan of the ark given in Genesis and asked several navy contractors. Not only was it big enough for the task entrusted to it, but it was seaworthy. Also, Noah didn’t gather the animals. The animals came to him.

I believe that Noah’s Ark is true. There was an article by an esteemed theologian in our diocesan paper that claimed it was allegorical as many theologians claim. Yet throughout the world, many civilizations believe this.

The Bible may not be a historical book in many ways, but I believe that some smart theologians have interpreted it a different way then the way it was written. Some of these also don’t believe in other Catholic truths such as “Adam and Eve”—then why is Mary the new Eve? And hell? Well, they will be surprised some day that that does exist and sin also. Love of God is the most important,but the justice of God, such as Noah’s Ark and Soddom and Gommorah are ignored.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Science can only speculate on what happenned.

Science speculating on something and Joe Blow down the street speculating on something are two very different things. One is to be given a certain amount of credence. Science is based on observation and testing. The most likely theory with the greatest evidence rules until another equally or more probable theory takes its place.

No scientific observation points exclusively to heliocentrism. Even Einstein admitted that:

Well, most evidence and observation of the human brain points to the idea that homosexuality is innate in some individuals. Paul calling it unnatural has nothing to do with this. The act of a man having sex with a man, putting parts of his body where they were not meant to go for the purpose of the propagation of the species is in itself unnatural. This has nothing to do with whether or not one was born with the desire to do this. Even the Church has not come out against this idea because the CHURCH herself maintains that science and religion are always BY NECESSITY compatible.

Don’t pit science and religion against each other and tell me that science is my “God”. That is foolish and completely against what the Church teaches. Are you a Catholic or a fundamentalist?

 

[Third_Day]

=Thoughtfulone;7694421]Well, most evidence and observation of the human brain points to the idea that homosexuality is innate in some individuals

.
“Most” evidence? What credible study has said that?

Paul calling it unnatural has nothing to do with this. The act of a man having sex with a man, putting parts of his body where they were not meant to go for the purpose of the propagation of the species is in itself unnatural. This has nothing to do with whether or not one was born with the desire to do this.

Do you believe homosexuals are born that way? Scripture calls homosexual sin an abomination. If one is born that way wouldn’t that make God the creator of an abomination?

Even the Church has not come out against this idea because the CHURCH herself maintains that science and religion are always BY NECESSITY compatible.

What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? When that happens it will be mandated by law that homosexuality be taught as a normal attraction in schools. When that happens the lawyers will be lined up to sue the Church for not allowing homosexuals to marry. Will you stand with the Church or with science?

Are you a Catholic or a fundamentalist?

A Catholic that believes in scripture and Sacred Tradition as held by the Magisterium.

Are you a Catholic or a cafeteria Catholic?

 

[Thoughtfulone]

.
“Most” evidence? What credible study has said that?

Well, put it this way. Almost no scientist uses a geocentric model for the solar system because it is a far more complicated model than a heliocentric one. Using a geocentric model serves no practical or scientific purpose. Technically, neither could be correct, but every scientist worth his salt uses a heliocentric model. So, every credible study for the past 500 years uses a heliocentric model to calculate the movement of the planets and the workings of the solar system.

Do you believe homosexuals are born that way? Scripture calls homosexual sin an abomination. If one is born that way wouldn’t that make God the creator of an abomination?

 

[Third_Day]

=Thoughtfulone;7695054] Well, put it this way. Almost no scientist uses a geocentric model for the solar system because it is a far more complicated model than a heliocentric one. Using a geocentric model serves no practical or scientific purpose. Technically, neither could be correct, but every scientist worth his salt uses a heliocentric model. So, every credible study for the past 500 years uses a heliocentric model to calculate the movement of the planets and the workings of the solar system.

Global Positioning Satelites are positioned using earth-fixed calculations not heliocentric calculations.

No, silly. For one to PRACTICE homosexuality is a sin. Being born with certain proclivities is NOT a sin. Get it?

That’s not what I am asking. If homosexuality is normal that the “practice” would also be normal.
What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? When that happens it will be mandated by law that homosexual “PRACTICE” is taught as a normal in schools. When that happens the lawyers will be lined up to sue the Church for not allowing homosexuals to marry. Will you stand with the Church or with science?

This is an absurd “slippery slope” argument. I don’t know where you live, but the government of the United States will never mandate that the Catholic Church allow homosexual marriage

Of course they will. The liberal lawyers will see that the Church is mandated to allow gay marriage.It will be a hate crime to deny them.

 

[Thoughtfulone]

Global Positioning Satelites are positioned using earth-fixed calculations not heliocentric calculations.

Haha! Of course they are! Think about it…

That’s not what I am asking. If homosexuality is normal that the “practice” would also be normal.
What side will you be on when homosexuality is declared to be “normal” by the entire scientific community? When that happens it will be mandated by law that homosexual “PRACTICE” is taught as a normal in schools. When that happens the lawyers will be lined up to sue the Church for not allowing homosexuals to marry. Will you stand with the Church or with science?

Again, this argument is absurd. This will never happen. Look at Westboro Baptist Church and the recent Supreme Court decision regarding their right to protest soldiers’funerals with signs that say “God hates fags” and you will see how remote the possibility is. Hey, you can make your own sign and join them!