|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: Noah's Ark | |||||||||||||||||||||||
nator Member (Idle past 2463 days) Posts: 12961 From: Ann Arbor Joined: |
quote: Is there some kind of big creature with a huge-treetrunk-like schlong? I sure hope so.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1637 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
i'm terrible at public speaking, actually. otherwise, i had breifly considered going into law.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Nighttrain Member (Idle past 4287 days) Posts: 1512 From: brisbane,australia Joined: |
No need to be a orator to be a lawyer , `rach, just so long as you are devious.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Cthulhu Member (Idle past 6145 days) Posts: 273 From: Roe Dyelin Joined: |
I never knew Leviathan was mentioned somewhere other than Job. (And Psalms. I think.) In those accounts, Leviathan sound a lot like a crocodile, as long as you remove the firebreathing part, which can easily be accounted for by the telling and retelling of a story.
Now that I see that Leviathan is mentioned elsewhere, I retract my assertion that Leviathan was based off of exaggerated accounts of a crocodile, because I was in error. Proudly attempting to Google-Bomb Kent Hovind's website Lying Dumbass
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1637 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
No need to be a orator to be a lawyer , `rach, just so long as you are devious. actually, i wanted to work pro-bono civil rights issues. *shrugs*
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
That's only logical. I see you as a debating lawyer, and also as a theologian.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Adminnemooseus Administrator Posts: 3984 Joined: |
You know... I saw it somewhere... Some indication that the topic was about... was about... Noah's Ark, that's it, Noah's Ark! Now where might I have seen that?
Adminnemooseus
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
Topic drift is a problem in itself. We shgould make a new forum thread about it !!!
But seriously, the great leviathan and Noah's Ark are very coexistent. Now, why couldn't Noah take the Leviathan on the ark? Obviously it was too big. Therefore, the Leviathan was able to travel to another part of the world during the Flood. And it most likely settled in the Slavic regions...And about the behemoth...why aren't we talking about him? If Job was the first authored book in the bible, then was this after or before the Flood? Of is the book of Job a human fable? This message has been edited by Specter, 05/05/2005 10:01 AM
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 461 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Now, why couldn't Noah take the Leviathan on the ark? Obviously it was too big That wasn't the criterion. All things with the breath of life were to be taken. Therefore Leviathan did not have the breath of life.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1637 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
Now, why couldn't Noah take the Leviathan on the ark? Obviously it was too big. leviathan is associated with the waters of the great deep, the primordial chaotic state of the universe before god came along and created the earth and heaven. when god floods the earth, he does it with this water. leviathan would have been right at home.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
Did yo unot understand? The Leviathan would have been right at home, but it would have also swam about.
Oh yeah, JohnF, there is a serious doubt in my mind that breath was the criterion. But just in case I'm wrong, please show me the verse, translation, and source from which you gathered that information. I'm always ready to accept new Truths. [by the way...If it's New, it's probably Not True.]
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 132 days) Posts: 34140 From: Texas!! Joined: |
Genesis 7:14-16
Aslan is not a Tame Lion
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 461 days) Posts: 6174 Joined: |
Oh yeah, JohnF, there is a serious doubt in my mind that breath was the criterion. But just in case I'm wrong, please show me the verse, translation, and source from which you gathered that information. I'm always ready to accept new Truths. King James. Genesis 6:17, Genesis 7:15, Genesis 7:22. These verses are often interpreted by YECs to mean that only terrestrial creatures who breathed using lungs were to be taken on the ark; that is, fish and insects and a few other things didn't go. It's a way of reducing the space required on the ark in a vain attempt to make the story more plausible. For example, After devastation ... the recovery:
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
arachnophilia Member (Idle past 1637 days) Posts: 9069 From: god's waiting room Joined: |
All things with the breath of life were to be taken. Therefore Leviathan did not have the breath of life. i don't see any mention of noah taking fish. or whales for that matter, which breathe air. noah built a boat, not a submarine.
quote:
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Specter Inactive Member |
I'm sorry ,Arachnophilia; I forgot to register that quote of yours as a quote in my last post. I didn't originally write that!
JohnF writes:
By the way, what does mean? All things with the breath of life were to be taken. Therefore Leviathan did not have the breath of life. And JohnF, thank you for the website (After devastation ... the recovery). This message has been edited by Specter, 05/06/2005 10:00 AM
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2025