|
Good post Mike.
Kind of like piling coals on top of your enemy. It doesn't
sound kind to us but in those days it was a kind thing to do to keep them
warm. I have heard it used wrong most of the time instead of the right
interpretation of what this actually meant.
Mark Jones
But look at the size of the ark, and compare it
to the size of today's ships. This was said to be a very good size ship. The
whole idea was to spare the animals and Noah's family, so therefore it didn't
have propulsion or a rudder and landed on Mt. Ararat (Asia Minor) in
Turkey. Unless God Spoke it and it just was, it's going to take while to build
that boat. One of the things that I am questioning here is how do we know what
a year was? What was a year back then? There were no Romans so how could you
use a Roman calendar to identify what a year was? What if those people were
not really that old (By our Roman calendar standards) and perhaps we just lost
something in the translation somewhere? What if that extra "0 on the end of
those ages was just an inkblot that looked like a "0" when it got translated?
If you take off one of those zeros on the ages , it makes them look a
lot more relatable to us and the way things are now. In some cultures it is OK
for teenagers to take wives (back then there wasn't a lot to pick from) .
Culture wasn't cultured yet. Remember, Israel was not yet into being yet, this
was before that, so how could you apply a Jewish calendar to it
also? Nimrod hadn't messed up the languages on top of that ziggurat at this
point. The references I have seen was that the seasons didn't start
happening until Noah set sail. What if what we normally accept to
be the truth is just accepted as the truth and then you find that there could
be more to it? Not saying it's wrong, but perhaps just incomplete? The
world was still being unfolded back then. I'm not a theologian or a
seminarian or even a Bible school graduate, but I bet questions like these get
asked at places like those because people want to understand and want the big
picture, not what is just passed out to suffice without actually doing the
research to gain the understanding to really comprehend what is was that
happened in depth. I don't challenge what the Bible says, I do challenge how
we understand it because I think we may have missed a few points along the
lines. (God's Word is not fallible, we the people are) Nimrod's
actions are why we have translations in the first place. We know languages in
their translations do not always match up, the translation can be saying this
and that when it is actually trying to convey something similar but yet
different. Hebrew doesn't match up with the Greek and none of the Latin based
languages really match up even though Latin is the root language from the
people who are believed to have settled in the Italian peninsula.
I'm just putting this out there. They are
some thoughts to ponder, Doubts? No they are not doubts. Just my belief that
what is glossed over and homogenized and prepacked actually looses it's real
flavor when it's frozen and the proper time doesn't get spent with it to
really understand what is actually being said. I think it deserves more
than a once or twice over and should have a serious more in depth look at what
it is actually saying because I think there is substance there that we could
actually be missing out on. Just like a prepacked frozen food. In Noah's day,
the food was fresh and not prepacked.
What if I'm right, what if I'm wrong?
It's not really of consequence to me, I just wanted to stir the pot to put an
accent on the potential of perhaps a boy coming to you as a Commander with
questions like that? It can happen. How would you answer him without assigning
him a research project or would you give him the prepacked food? Remember you
want the best for him.
Iron Mike
----- Original Message -----
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2003
12:01 AM
Subject: Re: [RR] Quiz
In a
message dated 9/12/03 11:02:31 PM Eastern Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
If we take it that way, then the same could be true for
Noahs wife. Maybe Noah wasn't married at this time
either???
We're pretty sure he was married, because he had thre
sons at age 500, before God instructed him on the ark.
Gen 5
32
After Noah was 500 years old, he became the father of Shem, Ham and
Japheth.
The verse reads "You shall come into the ark, you, your
sons, your wife, and your son's wives."
If we look at that
way, Noah could have been the only one, as we could extend the supposition
for Noah's wife and his sons as well.
Nonetheless, excluding
the idea that Shem was at lease 13 years old, the building of the ark took
97 years at most, not 120 that most people quote. These are probably
the same people who say that the "sons of God" in Genesis 6:2 who took
"daughters of men" to be their wives are actually fallen angelic
beings.
I agree. We also don't know how much help he had,
but 90+ years is a good stretch of time to build a ship, even one as large
as the ark.
Robert Hamilton
----- Forwarded Message
-----
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date:
Fri, 12 Sep 2003 19:33:14 EDT
Subject: Re: Fw: Re: [RR]
Quiz
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
In a message dated 9/12/03 11:25:00 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
And, 97 years is also stretching it. If we look at
Genesis 6:18 we see that God is telling Noah what he is going to do, and
mentions Noah's "sons ... and your son's wives". This indicates
that Noah's sons were married. What was the marrying age?
Let's assume that Shem was 13 when he married (he could have been
older). Subtract 13 from the 97 years determined in Genesis 11,
and we come up with 84 years.
I
disagree. I think perhaps that God knew his sons would have wives
when the flood came. He is also telling them in that verse that they
will go into the ark, which, by your logic, implies that it is already
built.
It's amazing how many people (and how many Chrisitan web
sites out there) take Genesis 6:3 and use it to support their
proposition that it took 120 years to build the ark.
Gen 6:3 And Jehovah said, My spirit shall not always strive
with man, in his erring; he is flesh. Yet his days shall be a hundred
and twenty years.
Robert
Hamilton
Lucas Hoffmann
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/aflatb/
Quaerite
prime regnum Dei
‘be ready always to give
an answer to every man that asketh you a reason of the hope that is in you
...’ (1 Peter 3:15)
Download a Free Royal Ranger Database. It's
packed with goodies and it will make record keeping fun!
Over 25 related
databases and 11 years of field experience. Just like Salvation it's
free!
http://home.classicnet.net/mjones02/index.html
|
