AbbyLeever said:
quote:
sorry, hypothesis not supported by actual biblical reference is not valid without it being naturally possible.
bringing the animals = mentioned = valid
hypbernation = not mentioned = not valid
what you believe is just rationalizations to attempt to reconcile the impossible with reality.
Personally, I have no problem with the piling on of miracles, even if not mentioned in the Bible (or, even if mis-described in the Bible).
So, if God helped build the ark - Fine.
God helped gather animals - Fine
God somehow got all the animals into the ark - Fine.
God somehow kept all the animals cared for - Fine.
God somehow produced and then disposed of all the water - Fine.
God somehow took care of all the other details - Fine.
The miracle that troubles me, is the final (unstated) one. That God lastly somehow removed any and all evidence of the flood having happened. What's the point of it all?
My conclusion:
The flood was either a great exaggeration of a lesser event, or total fiction.
Even if either of the previous is true, the function of the story could be some moral lesson, or could be some totally irrelevant verbiage.
I previous created a "Faith and Belief" topic,
" Assuming the flood was real", to explore the theological implications of the flood story. I think there was some good discussion at that topic, before it went on to the inevitable topic drift to elsewhere.
Cheers,
Moose
Professor, geology, Whatsamatta U
Evolution - Changes in the environment, caused by the interactions of the components of the environment.
"Do not meddle in the affairs of cats, for they are subtle and will piss on your computer." - Bruce Graham
™ Version 4.2
