-
Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
question about the ark
- Thread starter chipsgirl
- Start date
T
TexasSky
Guest
Animals have always been able to sense changes in weather and storms. In fact, as a little girl I was somewhat amazed by what appeared to be my grandfather's psychic abilities. He was always able to forecast the weather. He clued me in when I was about 7. He wasn't predicting the future, he was watching his herd. You could tell a storm was coming by their behavior, how serious the animals thought it would be, and which direction it was moving all by watching the animals.
I believe God sent the animals to Noah, and I believe that after the flood God dispersed them, but if that won't satisify a skeptic, remind them that science teaches the continental plates were once connected to one another, and that certain land masses change.
There are also cases of nautral phenonomen in modern times that amaze people. I've seen it rain frogs. We've probably all heard the stories of tornados scooping up farm animals and then depositing them, alive, many miles away.
Animals migrate. They have an uncanny ability to find ways through things that we never dreamed of.
I believe God sent the animals to Noah, and I believe that after the flood God dispersed them, but if that won't satisify a skeptic, remind them that science teaches the continental plates were once connected to one another, and that certain land masses change.
There are also cases of nautral phenonomen in modern times that amaze people. I've seen it rain frogs. We've probably all heard the stories of tornados scooping up farm animals and then depositing them, alive, many miles away.
Animals migrate. They have an uncanny ability to find ways through things that we never dreamed of.
Well, I tend to believe that the plates were connected but we can believe in stuff like that AND the bible. I am not aware of evidence in the Bible stating that the plates and continents were not connected.
If (and I am just saying if)they were connected though, would have been before or after the time of the ark? I'm not really in the know of what happened in what time period.
If (and I am just saying if)they were connected though, would have been before or after the time of the ark? I'm not really in the know of what happened in what time period.
I think the question that you must be able to adequately answer for your friend is how to explain both past and present biogeography.
Sticking with the marsupials of Australia you have two issues. One is that most of the world's present marsupials are only found there. Second is that the fossils of their ancestors are also found there and not the world over. Merely asserting that there could have been land bridges that would allow for passage does not explain why this mix of fauna was only there before the flood and why they returned there after the flood. It also does not allow for how the ecology of the land getting to Australia changed such that the fauna were supported along the way and then changed again so that after they passed that it would no longer support the fauna. For example, koalas ONLY eat eucalyptus. Where did they find eucalyptus along the way? It also does not present any evidence that the migration DID occur.
The link provided also deserves much closer scrutiny. Just starting at the top and checking its references you quickly find trouble. It says that "Likewise, monotremes were once thought to be unique to Australia, but the discovery in 1991 of a fossil platypus tooth in South America stunned the scientific community." But if you look up their reference, it says
"Egg-laying mammals once lived in South America. A tooth from an ancient platypus unearthed in Patagonia by a team of Argentinian palaeontologists is the first evidence of a monotreme living outside Australia and New Guinea. The discovery supports the theory that Australia and South America once shared a fauna which included marsupials and monotremes."
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg13117831.200
Far from "stunning", the article they cite says that the find was expected. I hope they do not play so loose with the facts in the rest of the article. But I would advise checking the rest of their references for factualness before you advise someone else to read it. The last thing we need is for a well intentioned Christian to give an unbeliever material that must play fast and loose with the facts to build a case for their belief. It could be very damaging.
Sticking with the marsupials of Australia you have two issues. One is that most of the world's present marsupials are only found there. Second is that the fossils of their ancestors are also found there and not the world over. Merely asserting that there could have been land bridges that would allow for passage does not explain why this mix of fauna was only there before the flood and why they returned there after the flood. It also does not allow for how the ecology of the land getting to Australia changed such that the fauna were supported along the way and then changed again so that after they passed that it would no longer support the fauna. For example, koalas ONLY eat eucalyptus. Where did they find eucalyptus along the way? It also does not present any evidence that the migration DID occur.
The link provided also deserves much closer scrutiny. Just starting at the top and checking its references you quickly find trouble. It says that "Likewise, monotremes were once thought to be unique to Australia, but the discovery in 1991 of a fossil platypus tooth in South America stunned the scientific community." But if you look up their reference, it says
"Egg-laying mammals once lived in South America. A tooth from an ancient platypus unearthed in Patagonia by a team of Argentinian palaeontologists is the first evidence of a monotreme living outside Australia and New Guinea. The discovery supports the theory that Australia and South America once shared a fauna which included marsupials and monotremes."
http://www.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg13117831.200
Far from "stunning", the article they cite says that the find was expected. I hope they do not play so loose with the facts in the rest of the article. But I would advise checking the rest of their references for factualness before you advise someone else to read it. The last thing we need is for a well intentioned Christian to give an unbeliever material that must play fast and loose with the facts to build a case for their belief. It could be very damaging.