Rabbits chew their cud- Leviticus 11:6 And the hare, because he cheweth the cud, but divideth not the hoof; he is unclean unto you. Snails melt- Psalms 58:8 As a snail which melteth, let every one of them pass away: like the untimely birth of a woman, that they may not see the sun. and bats are birds- Leviticus 11:13-19 These, moreover, you shall detest among the birds; they are abhorrent, not to be eaten: the eagle and the vulture and the buzzard, 14and the kite and the falcon in its kind, 15every raven in its kind, 16 and the ostrich and the owl and the sea gull and the hawk in its kind, 17and the little owl and the cormorant and the great owl, 18and the white owl and the pelican and the carrion vulture, 19and the stork, the heron in its kinds, and the hoopoe, and the bat."
Surely, that argument is not speaking in favour of the text? It is no miracle to point out what "seems" to be happening, getting things right is the only thing that can suggest that a text would be divinely inspired or similarly.
In Gabriel Garcia's book "One Hundred Years of Solitude" the priest proves God by levitating chocolate. I dont see why you cant prove God by salting a slug.
Exactly, the only reason the terms sunrise and sunset exist is because it appeared the sun revolved around the earth.
Well... That simply suggests to me that the word used had a more general meaning than the English word "bird" has today. Such are the pitfalls of translation, especially when the two languages come from such different cultures.
Deuteronomy 32:11 As an eagle stirreth up her nest, fluttereth over her young, spreadeth abroad her wings, taketh them, beareth them on her wings: Never heard of an eagle carrying chicks on its wings. Genesis 8:10-11 And he stayed yet other seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark; And the dove came in to him in the evening; and, lo, in her mouth was an olive leaf pluckt off: so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth. An olive tree grew in 7 days after the flood.
The "viper" that supposedly bit Paul does not exist on that island, and behave is a way totally unlike a real viper.
Or it survived the flood, I suppose. Not terribly likely after such a long period of time, I grant you
The flood covered the tallest mountain. If the dove brought back an olive leaf then the olive tree must have grown at the top of the tallest mountain. Otherwise Noah could have seen land himself.
how do you figure that? but fine if so, it just makes an outlandish story that much less connected to reality.
Another interesting point....Everest is 29,029 feet. That means that the Ark would have to have been floating on water, where the surface of the water was at atleast 29,030 feet above pre-Flood sea level. But at altitudes above 14,000, oxygen deprivation kicks in and by 20,000 feet a person would risk passing out. Or would the atmosphere/pressure ALSO "rise" with the sea level of a totally flooded Earth???
That could not be anyway because any good creationist knows that Mr Everest was left with many meters of 'muck", mud with seashells in, on top. Then it turned to stone. Then Mt Everest shot up to its present height.
Everest was not known to the people of that era and place, "tallest mountain" is Ararat (~5100 meters high ) and the ark allegedly ending up there is a symbolism because Armenians were the first nation to convert into christianity
Figure it this way. First you have to know how many cubic miles of water it would take to flood the planet 30,000 ft deep. Then get the weight; the mass of the earth would dramatically increase, disturbing the orbit of the moon and the other planets. The atmosphere would be pushed up, and as the same volume of gas would be covering a larger sphere, it would be thinned. You figure how much. Gravity would increase, as noted, so the atmosphere would be pulled down, increasing the density in a degree of counterbalance to the thinning from it being spread over a larger sphere. As noted elsewhere, getting rid of the extra water later was simple, a wind took it to Neptune.
According to Genesis 7:19-20 all the high mountains under the whole sky were covered with flood water. The waters prevailed above the mountains, covering them 15 cubits deep. (22 feet)
I rounded it off to 30,000 ft. Everest plus 45 ft then. A cubit is an inexact measure. The bible rounds things off too. Oh... do you suppose they went about with a line and sounded the water depth, somehow navigating over the top of the highest mountain, deep under water, and checked the depth? We wonder just how this info about water depth came about.
Can you supply the original text and the exact meaning of the word used? Its not my thing, but it seems to me that some translate it as "hills" in the sense we use it today, others as "montains". Certainly the ark-on-ararat people figure it means mountain, in the modern americna english sense of the word. Either way of course, we dont know how how they found out it was 15 cubits over the highest one, unless they navigated zactly over the peak and dropped a line. Do you have a line o that one?
