How do you suppose....

by exwhyzee 22 Replies latest watchtower bible

exwhyzee

Hey Louis, I hear what you're saying but how would angel DNA (if there was such a thing) be eliminated after a thousand years? Seems like it would be continously passed along to each child born
Aguest....If what you say is even possible, wouldn't there be Kangaroo fossils found in the middle east where Noah let them off the Ark and any where they traveled along the way before arriving in Austrailia? Also what is up with the whole (dear one and may you have peace) thing you add to your comments...am I missing something??
whatistruth

I think it have to do with the Nephilims. Most of the people of that time were contaminated with the rebels angels, until today we have in some of us DNA of the angels.
HAHAHAHA!..That just may be the dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire life..HAHAHAHA!
Sighco

Kangaroos were in the Garden of Eden, theres a picture in the Bible Story Book. It even has a picture of Kangaroos boarding the Ark
AGuest

Aguest....
Greetings, dear XYZ... and peace to you!
If what you say is even possible, wouldn't there be Kangaroo fossils found in the middle east where Noah let them off the Ark
Actually, he let them off in Eurasia, dear one (Armenia, where Ararat is, and not in the middle east, which is south of that area, sorry)... and who says there aren't fossils there? Man hasn't even found the "missing link" (though, he has often tried to contrive one)... so why be surprised if he hasn't found the fossil of, say, an ancient kangaroo? I mean, "they" say "dinosaurs roamed the earth" by the millions. Yet, we don't have millions of dinosaur fossils, nor do those we have come from all over the earth.
BUT... seeing as there were only two kangaroos (they were considerd "unclean")... maybe the scientists who are looking for kangaroo fossils near Ararat are looking in the wrong place (like that whole side where they've never been able to look when they're searching for the ark... because of "climate and conditions"... although I have reason to believe that the ark is nothing more than splinters now, because of such climate and conditions, which even worse back then... but I'm not a scientist, so who am I to speak of such things...)
(Say, what? Say, they're NOT looking for kangaroos?? Hmmmm... could that by why they haven't FOUND any?)...
Anyway, who's to say they (the kangaroos; not the scientists) didn't hop some distance, say, down to the indian continent, before even procreating? They were certainly quite young (oh, c'mon, you don't think Noah took OLD animals with him on the ark - surely? He took young... and thus SMALLER... and more fertile... animals, dear one)... perhaps not even at procreating age, because he certainly couldn't have them procreating ON the ark, could he? They were on it for close to 15 months!). So, it isn't unreasonble to think that they would have had some time before they had to... ummmm... do the "do." Could'a hopped around for several months, even... and so ended up a LONG way from Ararat, even in the area which we know today as "Australia" (only about 7,000 miles, today - not that far for a kangaroo, given no settlements, no roads, no people... no hunters)... if the land masses were as close as scientists say they were.
And no, dear BP, it really wasn't millions of years ago. But, certainly more than 7,000 or so (and that "a day is as a 1,000 years" applies to something MUCH different than what the WTBTS... and other Bible "scholars" use it for). For example, the assumption that it TOOK a 1,000 years (i.e., the "6th day") for the Most Holy One of Israel to bring Adham and Eve into existence... is ludicrous. But that's what folks get when they "keep observing dates, and times, and seasons." Got their minds upon the things... upon the earth. Ah, well... so their dichomoties... and confusion.
Also what is up with the whole (dear one and may you have peace) thing you add to your comments...am I missing something??
I cannot answer as to whether you are "missing something." I can only respond that I do as my Lord has taught me. (Matthew 10:12, 13; Luke 10:5, 6; 24:36; John 20:19, 21, 26)
Again, I bid you peace!
A slave of Christ,
SA
and any where they traveled along the way before arriving in Austrailia? Also what is up with the whole (dear one and may you have peace) thing you add to your comments...am I missing something??
exwhyzee

Wow...AGuest....I like how your mind works....ever think about starting your own religion and publishing your own literature ?
dgp

I was reading the Bible and apparently Noah didn't collect the animals, but they are alleged to come to him. Which means that the kangaroos had to hop their way across the sea, cross India, cross the mountains, cross the desert.... you get the point.
The dove Noah is said to have let go returned with an olive leaf. What I wonder is how trees survived something like 54 days under the water without dying. It rained "40 days and 40 nights", and then it took many more days for the land to "dry". So, all that water is said to have evaporated. Where did such a mass of water go?
An objection that someone could raise about someone surviving by hopping onto another boat can be that perhaps that someone who actually did that would not have food left for at least 54 days. Probably. But then I wonder how it was that Noah and his children DID have something to eat, and I don't mean while they were in the ark, but the months that would have had to go by before the fields had crops again. Let's not suppose that he survived by hunting, please, because there were only "seven animals" of the "pure ones", and two of the "impure ones". "Male and female". So Moses didn't hunt them for food, or else they would have never bred again.
And then, why Noah didn't die of disease, since all those bodies would have been rotting?
If you think about it, it's a ridiculous tale. You have to keep making explanations up.
exwhyzee

Exactly how I look at it DGP you said it better than I could.
In one of the Societies publications they said that Noah was on the Ark about a year. Even if it were only 54 days as you were thinking, it seems like the worms, ants, termites, and other organisims necessary for an ecosystem to enable plant life to grow once Noah to get off the Ark and start cultivating crops, would be gone..drowned, crushed to death under tons of water. Not to mention, the great mud slides that must have occured world wide. I could see some trees surviving if they were only flooded over at trunk level, but the earth was supposedly covered up to the mountain tops with of water cutting off sunlight and oxygen/carbon dioxide to the plants. Not to mention the great mud slides that must have occured. Maybe the olive branch came from a tree on the tip top of a mountain...but I don't know if olive trees survive at that altitude.
As far as boats go. If others did board existing boats, they could have fished for their food but maybe the sea life was killed off when all that fresh water was introduced into the briny environment they depended on to live. There is the possibility that with all that rain pounding down, the boats would have filled up with water and sunk.
Anyway the Society still views the story of Noah and the Ark as a literal event. That along with the inaccurate claims they've made regarding certain dates makes me question every other interpretation they have of the Bible they make as well. Including the claim that they are being directed by God 100%. and that anyone who isn't one of them or questions them is a gonner !
cyberjesus

May the force be with you and super ultra duper peace to you All!
you men of no faith! God did it all cant you see?
An all-powerful God would have been able to just kill all the bad humans. No need to flood the earth and drown every other human being. The idea that he would drown his own creatures, and then let the waters stand there just to make sure they were dead, is not one I would reconcile with the idea of a loving God
thats the way my son cleans everything, with lots of water! he grabs the water hose and forget about sweeping, With water you see. thats why God invented it.
we have in some of us DNA of the angels.
i believe this! I ve been called an angel before. Specially during sex. I am freaking fast! wham bam and thank you maam! They always thnk they are in heaven... that explains everything and why they say "oh god" so often. they are confused. They should say "oh angel"
HAHAHAHA!..That just may be the dumbest thing I have ever read in my entire life..HAHAHAHA!
Here now you are being so judgemental! I would like to remind you that you believed once that God would talk to some old men in Brooklyn New York and he would command you to go sell some magazines door to door.
Why are there no fossils of dead kangaroos going to australia? because they didnt die. they were hoping realy fast so they didnt get to die. and the few that did. the angels picked their bones.. thats why God has so many angeles... Take that you atheists!
I want a Koala Pet! I learned a new thing, we have Angels DNA.... is that why the Los Angeles Angels are named like that?
I want a Pet Koala!
AGuest

I was reading the Bible and apparently Noah didn't collect the animals, but they are alleged to come to him. Which means that the kangaroos had to hop their way across the sea, cross India, cross the mountains, cross the desert.... you get the point.
That assumes they came FROM the area called "Australia," dear dgp (peace to you!)... which is incorrect. They came from all over the region of Persia... which was WAY more than Iran today. Which would mean they didn't really have all that far to go to get to Noah. He didn't start OUT at Ararat...
The dove Noah is said to have let go returned with an olive leaf.
The second time, and after the raven was loosed and returned...
What I wonder is how trees survived something like 54 days under the water without dying.
Actually, the trees were under water for close about 15 months (not counting the 40 days/nights of rain and flooding). The waters receded over an approximate 54-day period. But that trees can survive this isn't weird: plants don't necessarily need SOIL to grow in. Haven't you even see some that just grow in water? I've seen a clippings doing just that. True, they night not grow as large or strong (unless they are also "fed"), but they tend to flourish. Also, if what you say is true, then parts of the Mississippi Valley should be a desert. And the rain forests should be sparse. And, yet...
It rained "40 days and 40 nights", and then it took many more days for the land to "dry". So, all that water is said to have evaporated. Where did such a mass of water go?
Well, you got your oceans and your lakes... your reservoirs and your ponds. Ever see an underground lake? Just how "shallow" do you think the earth's surface is??
I wonder how it was that Noah and his children DID have something to eat, and I don't mean while they were in the ark, but the months that would
have had to go by before the fields had crops again.
Your misassuming three things: they didn't store enough food on the ark for AFTER the flood (which shouldn't have been much - there were only six and folks didn't eat back then like we do today); they didn't share food with the animals (who also had to eat after the flood); and they didn't also take rapid growing plants on the ark.
Let's not suppose that he survived by hunting, please, because there were only "seven animals" of the "pure ones", and two of the "impure ones".
"Male and female".
In light of the fact that it was upon their leaving the Ark that they were given permission to eat meat... and there were five extra of the "clean" animals available (excluding those used for the sacrifice)... I think we would have to supposed this. Hunting, though, probably wasn't necessary. I mean, why release them in the first place?
So Moses didn't hunt them for food, or else they would have never bred again.
Moses?? Oh, you mean, Noah. No, Noah had not need to hunt. And logically, some would most probably have been pregnant by this time... particularly the rabbits, rats, and other deer or rodent species... all of which are edible (and, in some places around the earth, still eaten today), soooo...
And then, why Noah didn't die of disease, since all those bodies would have been rotting?
What bodies? I'm not sure I follow you...
If you think about it, it's a ridiculous tale. You have to keep making explanations up.
No making up, truly. And explanations are warranted only if people keep erroneously speculating... or asking questions about it...
I bid you peace!
A slave of Christ,
SA
St George of England

only to give them a second chance at Armageddon.
Current 'thinking' is I believe that they will NOT get a resurrection as they lived during a 'judgement period'
You may wish to check back in a day or two to see if this has changed as per S & G!
George

How do you suppose....

Share this