how big was Noahs ark

well?

with millions of speciies of animals alone, how big was this boat that carried 2 of each?

and after the flood, how did noah distribute the animals back to their natual habitat?

who fucking cares

The flood will only have been of around maybe where Noah lived, his country at the most.

The ship would carry maybe a few hundred animals (they would be land animals as birds would fly away and im pretty sure the fish would be happy).

I think it was as big as about 7 Luckdragons and just as fictional

Noah's arch is a rip-off if gilgamesh sp? I'm sure gilgamesh's flood was real but for only that and the neighboring countries.

it was around 133meters long and wide

i think

quote:"And God said unto Noah, . . . Make thee an ark of gopher wood; rooms shalt thou make in the ark, and shalt pitch it within and without with pitch. And this [is the fashion] which thou shalt make it [of]: The length of the ark [shall be] three hundred cubits, the breadth of it fifty cubits, and the height of it thirty cubits. A window shalt thou make to the ark, and in a cubit shalt thou finish it above; and the door of the ark shalt thou set in the side thereof; [with] lower, second, and third [stories] shalt thou make it. " (Gen. 6:13-16)

A cubit is the distance between an adult's elbow and tip of the finger, which could be any where from 17½ -21½ inches long. So, if we round it to 18 inches a cubit, the ark would be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high. Of course, for all we know, Noah could have been a giant with 30 inch arms or a midget with 13 inch arms. The cubit is not an exact measurement.

Well i guess that just about sums it up...

[Aphelion Corona]

It's an allegory and possibly an ancient tribal memory, who cares?

it wasn't actually a boat and there wasn't actually "living" animals on it either. its a metaphor, the story was taken from a sumerian story. just like everything in the bible.

[This message has been edited by neX (edited 04-13-2005).]

quote:Originally posted by OwningCampbellsport:

Noah's arch is a rip-off if gilgamesh sp? I'm sure gilgamesh's flood was real but for only that and the neighboring countries.

Did you ever think they could be telling the same story from two different cultures, as they are contemporary?

Why is it that Judaism/Christianity is always the villain? The stories were written at roughly the same time, why is it not more possible that a huge flood occured in the region and two different cultures wrote ontological explanatory stories for the event?

the stories were not written at the same time, what on earth are you talking about? the sumerian history predates it by over a 1,000 years. christianity is the villian with its anti-life teachings.

[This message has been edited by neX (edited 04-14-2005).]

[Digital_Savior]

I love how all the non-Christians are just so "sure" of themselves.

*laughs*

[Hexadecimal]

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

I love how all the non-Christians are just so "sure" of themselves.

*laughs*

Ah, but are the Christians any less sure of themselves?

[Adorkable]

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

I love how all the non-Christians are just so "sure" of themselves.

*laughs*

If you mean to address atheists, we're sure of ourselves because there's a lot of contemplation to go through before renouncing your faith (whatever faith it may be). Besides, I'm fairly certain there's a great deal more self-satisfaction and arrogance among Christians than non-theists, as most non-theists acknowledge the possibility of some god or god-like entity existing. Although I feel sorry for you Christians, as most of you are so indoctrinated that it will take a very horrible event in your life for you to reach the level of uncertainty which would allow you to re-examine your faith in an objective manner.

[Rust]

quote:Originally posted by aTribeCalledSean:

Did you ever think they could be telling the same story from two different cultures, as they are contemporary?

Why is it that Judaism/Christianity is always the villain? The stories were written at roughly the same time, why is it not more possible that a huge flood occured in the region and two different cultures wrote ontological explanatory stories for the event?

They are NOT contemporary, at least the dates in which they were written is not. The Epic was written centuries before the bible was, which makes it impossible for the Epic to be a 'rip-off' of Noah's story; moreover, while it may have been two interpretations of the same event, since the bible was written long after, the bible must have then been based on the Epic (in order to be able to interpret the event at all) and therefore saying that the bible is a 'rip-off' of the Epic is completely justifiable.

Back then, there were no PETA to bitch and moan, so Noah just shoved all the animals together in the back of the ship.

Resulting in weird mating, and thus the platypus.

[This message has been edited by Lacedwithdelight (edited 04-17-2005).]

[Digital_Savior]

HAHAHAHA...

Good point.

[Digital_Savior]

quote:Originally posted by Adorkable:

Besides, I'm fairly certain there's a great deal more self-satisfaction and arrogance among Christians than non-theists, as most non-theists acknowledge the possibility of some god or god-like entity existing.

Have you seen a great abundance of this "arrogance" among Christians on this particular thread ?

No.

I was referring to those that don't believe in God, in this thread.

Does that clarify it for you ?

And for the record, most Christians I know (myself included) actually came to BELIEVE in God because something horrific happened to them...not the other way around.

I also don't personally know anyone who has lost their faith in God due to some tragic event in their life.

[Digital_Savior]

quote:Originally posted by Hexadecimal:

Ah, but are the Christians any less sure of themselves?

No, but for an atheist to give an absolute on a thing that can only be spiritually explained, is fallacy.

That is essentially what I intended to point out.

They don't know, any more than WE can...so...

[Rust]

quote:Originally posted by Digital_Savior:

No, but for an atheist to give an absolute on a thing that can only be spiritually explained, is fallacy.

That is essentially what I intended to point out.

They don't know, any more than WE can...so...

Completely false. Ask any one of these people who you claim are so "sure of themselves", if they would change their mind had Science discovered new and compelling evidence to the contrary, and I would be willing to bet they would say 'yes'.

They are as "sure of themselves" as the material evidence allows it. That certainly cannot be said of Christians, or theists in general.