|
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 24, 2015 18:27:38 GMT -6
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 24, 2015 20:52:27 GMT -6
We have evaluated your results. Please don't breed.
|
|
|
Post by Mini Mia on Oct 24, 2015 21:10:56 GMT -6
Did it really say that?
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 24, 2015 22:16:16 GMT -6
I may have used a bit of literary license for the purposes of brevity.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Oct 24, 2015 23:51:23 GMT -6
Here's where I take exception to this quiz: I already knew the "story" indicates more cows than the rest of the animals but the only answers available for the quiz were: - 2
- none
- 1 - This was my response.
[Added] BTW, I got the same answer, "Perfect common sense".
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 25, 2015 13:43:44 GMT -6
Interesting statement Spock. The Hebrew phrase shibb’ah shibb’ah is translated somewhat vaguely in both the King James and American Standard Versions - it says clean animals were taken into the ark “by sevens” - meaning seven pairs. However, upon his departure from the ark after the Flood, he “built an altar to the Lord, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the alter”. Hence the reason he needed more than just two. Along with this, it's reasonable to assume that at the very least some of the animals were breeding while on the Ark meaning more than boarded would have departed from the ship. I understand that some will object to the concept, but it's possible that God had these residual animals live longer, have more than the usual number of offspring, etc. That a God who just flooded the earth could not and would not have continued to take action in the repopulation and resettlement of the earth doesn't seem reasonable to me. There's much the bible does not explain, but that doesn't render it inaccurate. There will always be those who want more details, more explanations, and more in way of current day proofs because 2000 year old miracles aren't good enough. Doubters are going to doubt no matter what.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Oct 25, 2015 14:06:58 GMT -6
And believers are going to believe no matter what. I don't begrudge you your beliefs, if in fact you are a believer, I just feel the bible, as a factual document, is a little vague. It also has a lot of stories that are adapted from older stories and myths; the story of the "great flood" is one such. It's kind of like a fishing story, it gets bigger with each retelling.
|
|
|
Post by stepper on Oct 25, 2015 14:50:24 GMT -6
And yet modern archeology and science continues to slowly prove the "stories" are accurate. It's very much like the argument that the book of Daniel CAN'T have been written before the events it describes because it was too accurate, too detailed, and HAD to have been written after the fact. That argument lasted for years and was waived in the face of every serious researcher. (Porphyry, a third century pagan, attacked the book of Daniel as a Maccabean forgery.) It was written after the fact - it's a book report on history - now prove me wrong. For a very long time no one could. Then one day the Dead Sea Scrolls showed up and were proven to A. match the Daniel book and B., it was written several hundred years before the events it describes. Chapter 11 is a good example.
|
|
|
Post by Spock on Oct 26, 2015 9:30:03 GMT -6
The only trouble is, if something is sufficiently vague then almost anything can be made to fit. I don't really want to get into an argument over religion ... or even a mild discussion. I have other concerns to keep me busy today. Like how DOES my Avatar keep changing itself? It must be haunted! [Added] Just found this video that sounds fairly interesting but, as I haven't checked its veracity, I have no way of knowing how accurate it is. The Noah's Ark of Total BS!
|
|