1 Days Left to Support a Troper-Created Project : Personal Space (discuss)

History Headscratchers / TheBible

30th Apr '16 9:24:06 AM allfictions
Is there an issue? Send a Message






to:

* Actually, [[http://www.johnsanidopoulos.com/2010/10/monastics-even-pray-for-demons.html Monks pray even for the demons]]. There are many other accounts of monks spending long periods praying for the salvation of demons (and the devil).
20th Feb '16 12:52:14 AM Luppercus
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

****I think genetics is more than enough proof for Evolution, how else can we explain to have 99% genes of Chimpanzees and Neanderthals? and the fact that in the same way our genes proof who our father, brother or cousin is we can do the same among species and now we know that we do have same ancestors as apes thanks to genetics. But, anyway, thatís a discussion for another place. Same case with the scientific method for messuring planet's age.
15th Feb '16 1:43:04 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

**** The only thing I'm skeptical about is the method scientists used to figure out the age of the Earth; I question the accuracy of the methods used. I do believe there is Continental Drift, and I do consider the scientific facts behind Pangaea more concrete than the "proof" behind Evolution Theory (though that's another subject). If you wish to elaborate further, as I asked "...how can you be sure that the method for calculating the planet's age is accurate?", let's take that to the discussion page.
8th Feb '16 2:40:40 PM Luppercus
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

***Earth's age is not a disputed issue for like 90% of people. I doubt the discussion here should go into Creationism vs Science argument; otherwise the debate would never end. Truth is, for all practical purposes, the Scientific community, the worldís schools and academies and the mainstream society, including most Christians, accept the idea that the world has millions of years and Pangaea cease to exist long before humans came to be. Yes, there is a very small minority of Creationist Christians, but are generally seem as fringe even for other Christians. The Continental Drift theory is accepted by most Christians in a similar way how most Western Christians accept the Evolution Theory. So IMO the explanation for this headscratcher should be using our current knowledge given by Science, otherwise would be a case of WMG.
5th Feb '16 5:16:03 AM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

** How do we know that Pangaea and the Earth predated humanity by millions of years? The figures that scientists give for the Earth's age are estimates based on various thing such as radioactive decay; which could actually be an imprecise method for determining an object's age as one can hardly do that for every atom of the planet. Could you explain how that figure of years was determined? Also, aside from the disputed issue of the Earth's age, that doesn't rule out the idea of humans living on Pangaea or the distribution of animals before and after the ark (there were [[{{Understatement}} a lot]] of years between Noah starting construction of the Ark to the beginning of the Flood and from the end of the Flood to the present day) and would explain a lot.
29th Jan '16 10:59:10 PM Luppercus
Is there an issue? Send a Message



to:

***Problem is Pangea cease to exist millions of years before the existence of the first human, according to our modern scientific knowledge. The current shape of the continents has been the same for millions of years, long before the existence of human beings, and also fossiles show most of the animals living in their habitats, again, before humans arrived.
28th Jan '16 4:41:22 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** What happened with animals than only eat something very specific and foreigner to the area? Letís take the koalas for example, they only eat eucalypt, so, how did Noah fed them? Did he had somehow eucalypt in the Mid East or did the koalas bring their own when they travel from Australia?

to:

** What happened with animals than only eat something very specific and foreigner to the area? Letís take the koalas for example, they only eat eucalypt, so, how did Noah fed them? Did he had somehow eucalypt in the Mid East or did the koalas bring their own when they travel from Australia?



* How about after the flood? Ignoring the risks of inbreeding, if every animal today is descended from two, or seven, ancestors who were in Turkey four thousand years ago, then how is it that many animals can only be found in places far removed from Turkey, with no reason to believe they were anywhere in between? How is it the rainforests of South America, or the continent of Australia, have species which only exist there?

to:

* How about after the flood? Ignoring the risks of inbreeding, if every animal today is descended from two, or seven, ancestors who were in Turkey four thousand years ago, then how is it that many animals can only be found in places far removed from Turkey, with no reason to believe they were anywhere in between? How is it the rainforests of South America, or the continent of Australia, have species which only exist there?there? Also, what happened with animals than only eat something very specific and foreigner to the area? Letís take the koalas for example, they only eat eucalypt, so, how did Noah fed them? Did he had somehow eucalypt in the Mid East or did the koalas bring their own when they travel from Australia?
28th Jan '16 4:37:53 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


** What makes you so sure the carnivores were? I've seen arguments to the effect that meat-eating itself didn't exist until after the flood occurred. *** While some state that teeth patterns, and other structural support, as well as descendant genera, all demonstrate and support the fact that at least ONE organism on the ark was carnivorous, some animals have a carnivorous physical structure but can exist on substances besides meat (eg; bears), making the theory of animals not being carnivorous until after the Flood plausible.

to:

** What makes you so sure the carnivores were? I've seen arguments to the effect that meat-eating itself didn't exist until after the flood occurred. occurred.
*** While some state that teeth patterns, and other structural support, as well as descendant genera, all demonstrate and support the fact that at least ONE organism on the ark was carnivorous, some animals have a carnivorous physical structure but can exist on substances besides meat (eg; bears), making the theory of animals not being carnivorous until after the Flood plausible.



** See the above argument; fish. Also, they could eat only some of the herbivore's offspring, since not ever animal only has one baby at a time (for the squeamish, this happens in the wild as wild animals revolve around survival).

to:

** See the above argument; fish. Also, they could eat only some of the herbivore's offspring, since not ever every animal only has one baby at a time (for (note for the squeamish, this happens in the wild as wild animals revolve around survival).



*** Which carnivores can't eat fish? Furthermore there are other aquatic creature that could feed them. After the waters of the Flood receded, several whales and dolphins could've been left stranded on land (a gruesome image but practical from a survival standpoint); note they are aquatic creatures but they are not fish. Also, seals and crabs can live in water and come up on land so they could've been a food source.

to:

*** Which carnivores can't eat fish? Furthermore there are other aquatic creature that could feed them. After the waters of the Flood receded, several whales and dolphins could've been left stranded on land (a gruesome image but practical from a survival standpoint); note they are aquatic creatures but they are not fish. Also, seals and crabs can live in water and come up on land so they could've been a food source.
source. In addition, if the food made them sick but the alternative was to starve to death most animals would put up with the food that made them sick to survive (like humans animals do desperate things when times are lean) until their conventional food was once again available.
28th Jan '16 4:34:22 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


*** Not exactly. For example, a young elephant is usually weaned from its mother when it's three years old (and a similar size to a large horse; much smaller than, less than half the size, of a full-grown elephant). Elepants don't reach full size until they're in their twenties and the Flood lasted around a year so the elephant wouldn't have grown much while it was on the Ark and would not be full-grown at any point. And that's the largest animal on the Ark (or one of them). How much room does it take to hold a pair of rabbits? Or a pair of beetles? The large animals get press because we're impressed by size, but most animals are ''small''. Furthermore, the word "kind" as used in the Bible, is not specified. We may not have to worry about technicalities, such as "32 species of rabbit" as those species may have emerged AFTER the Flood when the two rabbits on board had offspring and the species emerged as they spread to different parts of the world and changed.

to:

*** Not exactly. For example, a young elephant is usually weaned from its mother when it's three years old (and a similar size to a large horse; much smaller than, less than half the size, of a full-grown elephant). Elepants Elephants don't reach full size until they're in their twenties and the Flood lasted around a year so the elephant wouldn't have grown much while it was on the Ark and would not be full-grown at any point. And that's the largest animal on the Ark (or one of them). How much room does it take to hold a pair of rabbits? Or a pair of beetles? The large animals get press because we're impressed by size, but most animals are ''small''. Furthermore, the word "kind" as used in the Bible, is not specified. We may not have to worry about technicalities, such as "32 species of rabbit" as those species may have emerged AFTER the Flood when the two rabbits on board had offspring and the species emerged as they spread to different parts of the world and changed.



** The landmasses before the Flood may have been very different to the ones today, such as the Supercontinent Pangaea (a scientifically accepted idea). Let's use this theory, if Earth's land was just Pangaea, all those animals would've been part of the one landmass, thus no need for swimming or "boats and planes" to get around. It took many years for Noah and his family to build the Ark, enough time for Noah and family to gather the necessary food and for the animals to find their way. Also after the Flood, the THOUSANDS OF YEARS between then and now is more than enough time for the animals to spread to those land masses. As for why there was no Pangaea after the Flood, look at how waves erode coastlines today, and Floods can change the landscape. A global flood that lasts nearly a year, combined with still-occurring earthquakes and volcanoes would dramatically alter the landscape, hence no Pangaea after the Flood.

to:

** The landmasses before the Flood may have been very different to the ones today, such as the Supercontinent supercontinent Pangaea (a scientifically accepted idea). Let's use this theory, case; if Earth's land was just Pangaea, all those animals would've been part of the lived on one landmass, landmass regardless of how far apart, thus no need for swimming or "boats and planes" to get around. It took many years for Noah and his family to build the Ark, enough time for Noah and family to gather the necessary food and for the animals to find their way. Also after the Flood, the THOUSANDS OF YEARS between then and now is more than enough time for the animals to spread to those land masses. these new landmasses (for all we know Koalas could've been introduced to Australia before any recorded history, even that of the Indigenous Australians). As for why there was no Pangaea after the Flood, look at how waves erode coastlines today, and Floods how floods can change the landscape. topography of ground they submerge. A global flood that lasts nearly a year, combined with still-occurring earthquakes and volcanoes would dramatically alter the landscape, hence why there's no Pangaea after the Flood.



**** [[https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/how-did-plants-survive-the-flood/ Assuming that plants weren't taken, or that plants could not survive the Flood, is incorrect]].

to:

**** *** [[https://answersingenesis.org/the-flood/how-did-plants-survive-the-flood/ Assuming that plants weren't taken, or that plants could not survive the Flood, is incorrect]].



** Let's assume God didn't put the animals in stasis (which he could have done) not all animals need the same amount of attention. Some animals (such as bears and snakes) hibernate, thus reducing the necessary amount of time to look after them. Sloths, if the were on the ark, would've been extremely easy to take of; swing by once a day, leave food and water, occasionally clean waste, then leave.
** There are types of food that last more than one day (such as hay) so they could've left a bundle of hay with animals that eat it that was big enough to sustain them for several days; remember there are two of each animal, so that's only two cows, not an entire herd.
** It's also possible that they grouped similar animals together in the same large pen (eg; the two cows, the two horses and the two sheep), left bundles for them to eat from, a trough of water then let them take care of themselves for awhile and occasionally checking in on them.

to:

** That explanation is surprisingly easy, if verbose.
***
Let's assume your figure for how many animals on the Ark (it may have been less, it may have been more) and that God didn't put the animals in stasis (which he could have done) not done). Not all animals need the same amount of attention. Some animals (such as bears and snakes) hibernate, thus reducing the necessary amount of time to look after them. Sloths, if the they were on the ark, would've been extremely easy to take of; of as they sleep for around twenty hours a day; swing by once a day, leave food and water, occasionally clean waste, then leave.leave. Also regarding snakes, they can subsist on a large meal for a long period of time. For example, Anacondas can go several months or even a year without eating if they have a large meal (the size of a deer) beforehand; which is roughly how long the Flood lasted, so to use that example those snakes could've been fed a deer each when they went on the Ark and then left to their own devices until after the Flood.
*** There are types of food that last more than one day (such as hay) so they could've left a bundle of hay with animals that eat it that was big enough to sustain them for several days.

** There are types of food that last more than one day (such as hay) so they could've left a bundle of hay with animals that eat it that was big enough to sustain them for several days; remember there are two of each animal, so that's only two cows, not an entire herd.
**
*** It's also possible that they grouped similar animals together in the same large pen (eg; the two cows, the two horses and the two sheep), left bundles for them to eat from, a trough of water then let them take care of themselves for awhile and occasionally checking in on them.
28th Jan '16 4:17:52 PM quirkygenius
Is there an issue? Send a Message


Note: this isn't meant as destructive criticism. If anything, it encourages creativity in defending Literature/TheBible.

to:

Note: this isn't meant as destructive criticism. If anything, it encourages creativity in defending Literature/TheBible.



** [[NoCartoonFish Fish]] (or other aquatic creatures such as seals and dolphins; regarding the latter there were no anti-whaling laws at the time and it was a matter of survival).
** Noah took seven of every clean animal, and two of every unclean (Genesis 7:2). It's not spelled out, but presumably five of the each of the clean animals were for food.
*** What makes you so sure the carnivores were? I've seen arguments to the effect that meat-eating itself didn't exist until after the flood occurred.
**** Simply: Biology. There were dinosaurs at the time. The teeth patterns, and other structural support, as well as descendant genera, all demonstrate and support the fact that at least ONE organism on the ark was carnivorous.
** Not only the carnivores; what happened with animals than only eat something very specific and foreigner to the area? Letís take the koalas for example, they only eat eucalypt, so, how did Noah fed them? Did he had somehow eucalypt in the Mid East or did the koalas bring their own when they travel from Australia?

* How do the carnivores feed once they're out of the Ark? They'll have to wait until all the preys had offsprings enough to secure a population, and that may take months if not years.

to:

** An important fact to remember: 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 it's mate." IT WAS NOT TWO OF EVERY ANIMAL.
** [[NoCartoonFish Fish]] (or other aquatic creatures such as seals and dolphins; regarding the latter there were no anti-whaling laws at the time and it was a matter of survival).
** Noah took
survival). Some from the seven of every clean animal, and two pairs of every unclean (Genesis 7:2). It's not spelled out, but presumably five of the each of the clean animals were for could have been used as food.
*** ** What makes you so sure the carnivores were? I've seen arguments to the effect that meat-eating itself didn't exist until after the flood occurred.
**** Simply: Biology. There were dinosaurs at the time. The
occurred. *** While some state that teeth patterns, and other structural support, as well as descendant genera, all demonstrate and support the fact that at least ONE organism on the ark was carnivorous.
** Not only
carnivorous, some animals have a carnivorous physical structure but can exist on substances besides meat (eg; bears), making the carnivores; what theory of animals not being carnivorous until after the Flood plausible.
** What
happened with animals than only eat something very specific and foreigner to the area? Letís take the koalas for example, they only eat eucalypt, so, how did Noah fed them? Did he had somehow eucalypt in the Mid East or did the koalas bring their own when they travel from Australia?

* How do the carnivores feed once they're out of the Ark? They'll have to wait until all the preys had offsprings offspring enough to secure a population, and that may take months if not years.




to:

*** Which carnivores can't eat fish? Furthermore there are other aquatic creature that could feed them. After the waters of the Flood receded, several whales and dolphins could've been left stranded on land (a gruesome image but practical from a survival standpoint); note they are aquatic creatures but they are not fish. Also, seals and crabs can live in water and come up on land so they could've been a food source.



** Refer to the above, it was not just "two of every animal."



** This is an important fact, one that many people don't know: Read [



** The landmasses before the Flood may have been very different to the ones today, such as the Supercontinent Pangaea (a scientifically accepted idea). Let's use this theory, if Earth's land was just Pangaea, all those animals would've been part of the one landmass, thus no need for swimming or "boats and planes" to get around. It took many years for Noah and his family to build the Ark, enough time for Noah and family to gather the necessary food and for the animals to find their way. Also after the Flood, the THOUSANDS OF YEARS between then and now is more than enough time for the animals to spread to those land masses. As for why there was no Pangaea after the Flood, look at how waves erode coastlines today, and Floods can change the landscape. A global flood that lasts nearly a year, combined with still-occurring earthquakes and volcanoes would dramatically alter the landscape, hence no Pangaea after the Flood.



** Interestingly, regarding Mount Everest, [[https://www.papertrell.com/apps/preview/Handy-Answer-Book/handy%20answer%20book/Can-mountains-grow-and-shrink/001137006/content/SC/51360d12172536090c7a56ac_PlanetEarthElementHTML.html mountains do grow or shrink over time]]. Mount Everest may not have been as tall then as it is today, it may not have even been the world's tallest mountain at the time.

to:

** Interestingly, regarding Mount Everest, [[https://www.papertrell.com/apps/preview/Handy-Answer-Book/handy%20answer%20book/Can-mountains-grow-and-shrink/001137006/content/SC/51360d12172536090c7a56ac_PlanetEarthElementHTML.html mountains do grow or shrink over time]]. Mount Everest may not have been as tall then as it is today, it may not have even been the world's tallest mountain at the time.
This list shows the last 10 events of 848. Show all.
http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/article_history.php?article=Headscratchers.TheBible