Is the story of Adam, Eve, the Garden of Eden and the snake to be taken as literell?

[Tintin]

Christian scientists have estimated that there didn't need to be any more than 8,000 individual kinds on board the ark (including extinct kinds) and that Noah would have taken those creatures that were juvenile, but ready to breed upon exiting the ark. Take into account that no insects and sea creatures needed to go aboard the ark and that species is a man-made classification. But there's plenty of information out there for those people who actually are looking for answers and aren't just shouting the loudest to draw attention to themselves.

 

[kedge]

Christian scientists have estimated that there didn't need to be any more than 8,000 individual kinds on board the ark (including extinct kinds) and that Noah would have taken those creatures that were juvenile, but ready to breed upon exiting the ark. Take into account that no insects and sea creatures needed to go aboard the ark and that species is a man-made classification. But there's plenty of information out there for those people who actually are looking for answers and aren't just shouting the loudest to draw attention to themselves.

Makes sense, i can believe that based upon reason and logic alone. Not sure about the insects part, i mean, many of them are land dwellers, but i'm sure they wouldn't take up that much space on the ark. If there was no dry land and all trees and mountain ranges were covered in water where could the common house fly land?

 

[Tintin]

Makes sense, i can believe that based upon reason and logic alone. Not sure about the insects part, i mean, many of them are land dwellers, but i'm sure they wouldn't take up that much space on the ark. If there was no dry land and all trees and mountain ranges were covered in water where could the common house fly land?

It's not really a matter of space at all. Many insects could have survived on floating mats/rafts of reeds and grasses etc, on logs and in shrubs and in trees (those with undercovering of some fashion). And many kinds of insects and sea creatures may have become extinct during the Flood (especially with the complete restructuring of the earth eg. continental drift taking place). Besides, insects aren't included in the Hebrew word for all life being wiped from the face of the earth.

 

[kedge]

It's not really a matter of space at all. Many insects could have survived on floating mats/rafts of reeds and grasses etc, on logs and in shrubs and in trees (those with undercovering of some fashion).

Good thinking, that's reasonable and logical.

 

[kedge]

First, it is impossible for Noah to gather together all the land animals that existed at the time of the flood.

I don't think anyone knows exactly what species of land animals and creatures were around in noah's time nor is it known how many kinds. Also, was it noah who gathered the animals or was it God?.

Next, it is impossible for a ship constructed as it was to float even when it was empty.

Have you built one and tried it out?

The ark did not have enough room for all the animals of the world.

The world in which noah lived, but how does anyone know that the ark that noah built was not big enough to hold the known species in that time period?

and it would have taken two additional arks for the food for the approximately year long trip.

Based on what though?, mans word or God's word?

Finally, the behavior of the animals in relation to each other would have destroyed the ark before the rain came.

From a purely humanistic and natural point of view i can see where you are coming from but what about God's power, did he not create the sun that hangs upon nothing?, do you believe it is impossible for God to take command of our natural world and its inhabitants?

The only way that the Ark of Noah completed it's mission, was by the hand of God.

I would agree with this because those that trust in the will of God will be saved according to the Bible.

 

[Pumicestone]

It is not often that I yield. But Kedge has rendered me speechless.

e.g. It matters not whether God or Noah rounded up the animals.
Genesis says in one part two of each kind (a male and a female) and elsewhere seven pairs of some kinds (14).
So with those rotten dogs ... whether we talk kinds or species or breeds or whatever, in the span of 6000 years we now have many hundreds -probably thousands of types. Which I reckon is improbable.

And you certainly have not addressed the issues of all those critters from far afield (and way out of their comfort zones) like Polar bears, pandas, koalas, alpacas, sloths, emus, death adders, rhinos and on and on and on and on .....

Nor their diverse food needs for the best part of a year

And so much more.

 

[Jeff_56]

it is almost too simple.....


no...

in fact,

it is too simple.....

and it is a secret.(from you) ....


it is well known to (some of) the disciples of jesus.



keep seeking IF you ever want to know the truth....

 

[Pumicestone]

Christian scientists have estimated that there didn't need to be any more than 8,000 individual kinds on board the ark ....

I'd dearly like the names of some of those "scientists" - or even just links to their pearls of wisdom.
It could be interesting to see if their particular fields of science are relevant and how genuine their qualifications are .....


But, "8000 individual "kinds" " hmmmm

Remember this bit about the 7 pairs of every 'clean' kind (most animals) ?

New International Version Genesis 7:2
"Take with you seven pairs of every kind of clean animal, a male and its mate, and one pair of every kind of unclean animal, a male and its mate,"

So your 8000 'kinds' (if that were anywhere near accurate) would still be a huge number of actual beasties.


But THEN ....
"No one knows for sure how many species of animals exist on Earth.
In fact, some 10,000 species of animals are discovered each year, with over one and a half million species already described.
Projections for the total number of species on Earth range from 2 million to 50 million.

1. Estimated Number of Animal and Plant Species - Fact Monster
   
   www.factmonster.com/ipka/A0934288.html
   
   

 

[Pumicestone]

SO - From a very dodgy 8000 "kinds" to a bare minimum of 2 million species - in just 6000 years ?.

There's been an awful lot of evolution going on ....... la de da
One could be forgiven for thinking that could take tens of thousands of years - even millions !

And we haven't even touched on all those extinct critters ......... many of which were humungous, with appetites to match.

 

[kedge]

in the span of 6000 years we now have many hundreds -probably thousands of types. Which I reckon is improbable.

There are millions of species, but the truth is there are not millions of completely different types, what i seen is variation of a kind. Dogs is one of the most simple to explain, first, there would be no need to have all the dog breeds known today on noah's ark, in fact i would guess that there was only a select few dog kinds when God created the first kinds in the garden of eden. Think about it?, God made only two human beings in the beginning, male and female He created them, one man and one woman, so how is it that there are now billions of human beings on planet earth?. Honestly, i have worked it out for myself and it is not rocket science, it is so obvious. Of course not everyone is willing to believe in God nor His creative power. It's the same with birds, birds are birds and what we see is a vast amount of variation, the way i see it is God allowed for diversity within His created kinds, but only at the species level therefore one type of animal/creature did not change over long periods of time into a completely different type with different traits so on and so forth. Human beings are human beings the world over, yet there is so much variation, from skin tone to hair texture to height, to eye colour, suo nice that we all don't look the same but all human beings have only the human genome so human beings can only arise from human beings. Of course others believe otherwise and have different worldviews of origins.

And you certainly have not addressed the issues of all those critters from far afield (and way out of their comfort zones) like Polar bears, pandas, koalas, alpacas, sloths, emus, death adders, rhinos and on and on and on and on.

Yet for all we know all those kinds you mention could of been in the garden of eden (which i presume would of been a very large land mass?), polar bears have white fur so they are just a white furred bear and can live in different climates, we all can adapt to certain environement within reason, how does anyone know that eden didn't have snow topped mountains and snow coverd land below in that certain region of eden?, how does anyone know exactly what God's first created climate was like in the beginning?. It's all possible with God and that's fair to say in my honest opinion.

 

[kedge]

And we haven't even touched on all those extinct critters ......... many of which were humungous, with appetites to match.

Depends if one believes the Bible is really God's word through imperfect human beings?,

Isaiah 65:25 The wolf and the lamb shall graze together; the lion shall eat straw like the ox, and dust shall be the serpent’s food. They shall not hurt or destroy in all my holy mountain,” says the LORD.

 

[kedge]

In fact, some 10,000 species of animals are discovered each year.

That's misleading, there is no way that ten thousand completely different types are discovered, one might find many variations of the same kind yes.

 

[MarcR]

Some food for thought on the story of Noah's Ark.

First, it is impossible for Noah to gather together all the land animals that existed at the time of the flood.

Next, it is impossible for a ship constructed as it ark was to float even when it was empty.

The ark did not have enough room for all the animals of the world, and it would have taken two additional arks for the food for the approximately year long trip.

Finally, the behavior of the animals in relation to each other would have destroyed the ark before the rain came.

You can take the above any way you want to.

The only way that the Ark of Noah completed it's mission, was by the hand of God.

I believe that when Scripture ans 'science' are in conflict, Scripture is always correct.

I believe that there many distinct differences between science and 'science', which I define as science under the influence of secular humanism (an atheistic religion).

I believe that when a reading of Scripture, in the original languages, (which is consistent with common usage) reconciles Scripture with science; that reading should at least be considered.

In Genesis chapter 1, we are told:

בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ

At first God created the heavens and and the earth.

וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָיתָ֥ה תֹ֨הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְחֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־ פְּנִ֧י תה֑וֺם ֿוְר֣וּחַ ֿאֱלֹהִ֗ים ֿמְרַחֶ֖פֶת ֿעַל־ פְּנֵ֥יֿ ֿהַמָּֽיִם׃ֿ


Sometime later the earth was (a) desolation and (a) waste; and darkness was upon the face of the waters, and. the Spirit of God moved upon the face face of the deep.

וַיֹּא֥מֶר אֱלֹהִ֖ים יְהִ֣י א֑וֺרוַֽיְהִי־ אֽוֺר


Sometime later God said, let there be light; and there was light.


This suggests but does not demand a gap in time between verse 1 and verse2; and/ or between verse 2 and verse 3; and allows but does not demand that the 6 day creation narative, which begins with verse 3 is recreation after a cataclysmic upheaval; perhaps engendered by the fall of Satan.

It is noteworthy that the word בָּרָ֣א created does not appear again until verse 21; and all occurrences of the word יַּ֣עַשׂ translated made, in the intervening verses, can also be tramslated: called forth, made manifest, or allowed to be seen.


This allows for the sun, moon, and stars; and the original earth to be part of a previous creation.

In verse 21 we see that God created aquatic animals and birds after their kind on the fifth day; and verse 24 tells us that God created land animals other than birds after their kind on the sixth day. By common usage, kind can not be translated less narrowly than family; but it can be translated more narrowly if you are so inclined. This allows all members of the dog family: wolves, coyotes, dingoes, dholes, hyenas, jackels, etc. to have come from the same ancestral parents. It also allows for Noah to have taken one pair or seven individuals of each land dwelling zoological family onto the ark.

 

[wincam]

It is not often that I yield. But Kedge has rendered me speechless.

e.g. It matters not whether God or Noah rounded up the animals.
Genesis says in one part two of each kind (a male and a female) and elsewhere seven pairs of some kinds (14).
So with those rotten dogs ... whether we talk kinds or species or breeds or whatever, in the span of 6000 years we now have many hundreds -probably thousands of types. Which I reckon is improbable.

And you certainly have not addressed the issues of all those critters from far afield (and way out of their comfort zones) like Polar bears, pandas, koalas, alpacas, sloths, emus, death adders, rhinos and on and on and on and on .....

Nor their diverse food needs for the best part of a year

And so much more.

false data, false conclusions - there were no special comfort zones - there was only one landmass - the landmass was smooth and level - the weather was clement, the fruit and veg were lush and plentiful - the water was invigorating - the air was healthy - all conducive to long lives and many generations of births etc - btw it seems there are more people living today than have ever died as I read it somewhere = wincam

 

[wincam]

false data, false conclusions - there were no special comfort zones - there was only one landmass - the landmass was smooth and level - the weather was clement, the fruit and veg were lush and plentiful - the water was invigorating - the air was healthy - all conducive to long lives and many generations of births etc - btw it seems there are more people living today than have ever died as I read it somewhere - btw it seems there are more humans on earth today than have ever died I read somewhere and this does not apply to any other animal including rabbits or fish or birds even - wincam

 

[dcontroversal]

I believe that when Scripture ans 'science' are in conflict, Scripture is always correct.

I believe that there many distinct differences between science and 'science', which I define as science under the influence of secular humanism (an atheistic religion).

I believe that when a reading of Scripture, in the original languages, (which is consistent with common usage) reconciles Scripture with science; that reading should at least be considered.

In Genesis chapter 1, we are told:

בְּרֵאשִׁ֖ית בָּרָ֣א אֱלֹהִ֑ים אֵ֥ת הַשָׁמַ֖יִם וְאֵ֥ת הָאָֽרֶץ

At first God created the heavens and and the earth.

וְהָאָ֗רֶץ הָיתָ֥ה תֹ֨הוּ֙ וָבֹ֔הוּ וְחֹ֖שֶׁךְ עַל־ פְּנִ֧י תה֑וֺם ֿוְר֣וּחַ ֿאֱלֹהִ֗ים ֿמְרַחֶ֖פֶת ֿעַל־ פְּנֵ֥יֿ ֿהַמָּֽיִם׃ֿ


Sometime later the earth was (a) desolation and (a) waste; and darkness was upon the face of the waters, and. the Spirit of God moved upon the face face of the deep.

וַיֹּא֥מֶר אֱלֹהִ֖ים יְהִ֣י א֑וֺרוַֽיְהִי־ אֽוֺר


Sometime later God said, let there be light; and there was light.


This suggests but does not demand a gap in time between verse 1 and verse2; and/ or between verse 2 and verse 3; and allows but does not demand that the 6 day creation narative, which begins with verse 3 is recreation after a cataclysmic upheaval; perhaps engendered by the fall of Satan.

It is noteworthy that the word בָּרָ֣א created does not appear again until verse 21; and all occurrences of the word יַּ֣עַשׂ translated made, in the intervening verses, can also be tramslated: called forth, made manifest, or allowed to be seen.


This allows for the sun, moon, and stars; and the original earth to be part of a previous creation.

In verse 21 we see that God created aquatic animals and birds after their kind on the fifth day; and verse 24 tells us that God created land animals other than birds after their kind on the sixth day. By common usage, kind can not be translated less narrowly than family; but it can be translated more narrowly if you are so inclined. This allows all members of the dog family: wolves, coyotes, dingoes, dholes, hyenas, jackels, etc. to have come from the same ancestral parents. It also allows for Noah to have taken one pair or seven individuals of each land dwelling zoological family onto the ark.

Yes in deed and I agree!

 

[FancyNancy]

So hang on, just so I'm clear, Noah took only two dogs (or maybe seven?) - and from them we have the hundreds (perhaps even thousands) of species which exist today ?
From the Great Dane to the Chihuahua - and even wolves and dingoes and such ?

And in mankind, the Chinese, the pygmy, the Swede and the Eskimo -let alone the Australian aborigine
(which every paleontologist, archaeologist and anthropologist agrees has been here for at least 40,000 years) -
all have actually evolved in what - 6000 years or so ?

Good trick !

Dog breeds are mostly orchestrated by human engineering. I think the same holds true for the domestic cat.

 

[FancyNancy]

Simply that the Tree of Life represented Christ, the Tree of Good & Evil represented death, the serpent represented Satan, etc.

There are lots of allegorical representations in the bible but they do not negate the literal truth of the accounts. I mean, there really was a tree that bore fruit which Adam and Eve, real people, partook of, and there really was a serpent who seduced the mind of Eve...et cetera!

 

[FancyNancy]

God tends towards the argument that the Bible is written in parable form: "Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2I will open my mouth in a parable" (Psalm 78:1-2)

"And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:12That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them."

In other words, the true believers are given to understand the mysteries of the kingdom, but the unsaved encounter the Bible but all of it is done in parables which they do not understand.

Given that parables have an interpreted meaning which is the most important meaning, people sure do spend a lot of time trying to figure out the surface text. I think getting at the interpreted meaning is far and away the most important thing for parables.

What do you mean, "all of it is done in parables"?? That's just not so.

 

[birdie]

Originally Posted by birdie

God tends towards the argument that the Bible is written in parable form: "Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth.
2I will open my mouth in a parable" (Psalm 78:1-2)

"And he said unto them, Unto you it is given to know the mystery of the kingdom of God: but unto them that are without, all these things are done in parables:12That seeing they may see, and not perceive; and hearing they may hear, and not understand; lest at any time they should be converted, and their sins should be forgiven them."

In other words, the true believers are given to understand the mysteries of the kingdom, but the unsaved encounter the Bible but all of it is done in parables which they do not understand.

Given that parables have an interpreted meaning which is the most important meaning, people sure do spend a lot of time trying to figure out the surface text. I think getting at the interpreted meaning is far and away the most important thing for parables.



What do you mean, "all of it is done in parables"?? That's just not so.

I gave you some scriptures that says it is so. Do you have any scriptures that say it's not so?