Defend the Noah's Ark narrative

How much food and water do's DNA from an elephant consume? You didn't read my post - you just skipped over it to add your own narrative. Earth was seeded by ETs long ago. You could put all of the animal kingdom in a refrigerator - no feed needed and no messy clean up, plus they wouldn't be trying to eat each other. Why do you keep quoting from a book written by man?

 

Remember when the Ice Age ended about 10-12,000 years ago? How many islands got flooded then?

 

I'm sure you believe that.

 

So where did those ETs come from, Pluto? Imagine finding elephant bones on Pluto. Wouldn't that blow your mind? That would be better than finding zombies on Mars or unicorns on Venus. .

 

I have no clue what you are talking about and can only guess.

1. The concept of an ark is possible, just not the way the Bible described it hence making the Bible untrue.

2. Noah had ancient technology to collect DNA samples (perhaps given by aliens meaning that aliens had a part in writing the Bible)

3. Something else.

Please clarify.

 

That just happened to agree in large measure with the biblical Noah story, what a coincidence. https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/flood-legends/flood-legends/

As you would expect, the civilizations closest to the event got it most right.

 

Absolutely.
God controls all things. Knows all things.
Knew you before you were born. Know everything about everything. Which also means no free will.

 

What constitutes a sin?
According to the story, every single human, but 1, will sin.
Heaven will be filled with souls that sinned.

 

No it doesn't.

 

How do you define alive?

 

Just like the person I've put on ignore, I would ask you not to use Ken Ham as a source of wisdom.

 

Except the story explicitly states, they came to the ark as animals, 2x2. Not collected DNA.


Nevertheless, even if we presume that “kind” is synonymous with “species,” “there are not very many species of mammals, birds, amphibians and reptiles. The leading systematic biologist, Ernst Mayr, gives the number as 17,600. Allowing for two of each species on the ark, plus seven of the few so-called “clean” kinds of animals, plus a reasonable increment for known extinct species, it is obvious that not more than, say, 50,000 animals were on the ark” (Morris, 1987).
https://www.gotquestions.org/Noahs-ark-animals.html

The Floodwaters Arrive
…14they and every kind of wild animal, livestock, crawling creature, bird, and winged creature. 15They came to Noah to enter the ark, two by twoof every creature with the breath of life. 16And they entered, the male and female of every living thing, as God had commanded Noah. Then the LORD shut him in.…
https://biblehub.com/genesis/7-15.htm

While anyone can make up anything they want, the bible states what happened and how.

 

Oh? You've been there and have 1st hand knowledge?
Please, details.
Or is this another story, like the DNA one.

 

Ever heard of Doggerland?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doggerland

 

It's exactly what you talked about in your post. Microevolution is speciation. In order for "kinds" to result in all the species we have now between 5,000 years ago and today, that would require "Super Evolution" to work at speeds magnitudes faster than science posits.

 

religion is like supporting your home team in sports, most people will say they support everything they do.... and it's ok.... look at deflategate

 

Except they don't. Answers in Genesis lies. They have a clause in their contract that every person who contributes to them agrees to that even if they have evidence that the Flood didn't happen, they will never contradict the Bible.

 

So God is objectively evil. Good to know.

 

Yes, it does. It is omniscient.

Tools
Verse page
Verse Concepts
Psalm 147:5
Great is our Lord and abundant in strength; His understanding is infinite.
There's more. https://bible.knowing-jesus.com/topics/God,-Omniscience-Of

 

*14they and every kind of wild animal, livestock, crawling creature, bird, and winged creature.*
What about the flying fish?

 

King James Bible
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these things.

No, it just created it for humans. Keeps the boredom down, infinity takes forever. Also, gives a reason to split humans up at some point based on a judgement.
Even though, as an omniscient being, it already knows the entire outcome.

 

Explained here, if you're really interested: https://www.ucg.org/bible-study-too.../does-isaiah-45-7-imply-that-god-creates-evil

The KJV isn't the best translation, so of course atheists generally use it.

"Many Hebrew words have a broad range of meanings. While the Hebrew word translated “evil” in the King James Version usually refers to unethical or immoral activity, it can also mean times of distress (Amos 6:3) and is sometimes contrasted with shalom (peace). The New International Version renders the passage, “I form the light and create darkness, I bring prosperity and create disaster.” Similarly, the New Living Translation offers, “I am the one who creates the light and makes the darkness. I am the one who sends good times and bad times.” Tanakh, The Holy Scriptures: The New JPSTranslation According to the Traditional Hebrew Text confirms this understanding with, “I form light and create darkness, I make weal and create woe—I the Lord do all these things.”

So for those who do evil and reject him, He will bring woe. You might want to take a lesson from that.

 

And who have accepted God's offer of forgiveness through faith in Christ's atoning death on the cross.

 

Wow! There's an accusation I've not heard. You believe what many other fundamentalist Christians believe in a worldwide flood, and yet you just threw under the bus the entire KJV only English speaking Christian community who believe the KJV was a "second revelation".

Many atheists quote the KJV because it's the only translation accepted by many evangelical Baptists. Quoting the NIV (or my preferred translation the NRSV) would be a non-starter to having a debate with them.

 

......and what Jesus believed.

I didn't throw them under the bus, I said there are better translations. Some disagree, but it is something we have Christian liberty one, not an essential of the faith.

I would bet a small minority of church bodies today are KJV only.

Another example that has caused a lot of mischief, the KJV says 'Thou shalt not kill', where it should read 'Thou shalt not murder.'