How did Noah fit all those animals on the ark?
- Thread starter NDS
- Start date
Num 24:17
17 "I see Him, but not now;
I behold Him, but not near;
a Star shall come out of Jacob;
a Scepter shall rise out of Israel,
And batter the brow of Moab,
And destroy all the sons of tumult.
NKJV
"Although the writer -or editor- of the book of Numbers seems to have had king Josiah in mind when he composed these lines, from the second century onward, this text was interpreted as a prediction of the coming of the Messiah."
http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messiah_11.html
Hmmmmmm, sounds familiar.
_________________________________________________________
Deut 18:15
15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren.
Wow, for a minute there I thought Moses was talking about Mohammad. Notice that he uses the word "Prophet," to describe this person. Not "Son of God," not "Messiah."
Photizo, was Jesus just another "Prophet" like the Quran says and like Moses describes him as being?
___________________________________________________
Gen 49:9-12
9 Judah is a lion's whelp;
From the prey, my son, you have gone up.
He bows down, he lies down as a lion;
And as a lion, who shall rouse him?
Notice here how the "he" and "him" are referring to Judah. Jacob here starts referring to Judah with the pronouns "he" and "him" from this point on.
10 The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
Nor a lawgiver from between his feet,
Until Shiloh comes;
And to Him shall be the obedience of the people.
11 Binding his donkey to the vine,
And his donkey's colt to the choice vine,
He washed his garments in wine,
And his clothes in the blood of grapes.
12 His eyes are darker than wine,
And his teeth whiter than
NKJV
The he and him are still referring to Judah, not Jesus.
"till he come to Shiloh;" and the LXX Greek, "until that which is his shall come to Shiloh."
While some Christian interpreters believe Gen. 49:10 to be a prophecy of Jesus, some Muslims interpret it as a prophecy of Muhammad, and likewise, some Rastafarians have associated the name with the return of Haile Selassie I.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiloh_(Biblical)
Here is the New International Version's translation:
Gen 49:10
10 The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler's staff from between his feet,
until he comes to whom it belongs
and the obedience of the nations is his.
NIV
Hmmmmmm, sounds like its still talking about Judah to me.
_________________________________________________
Gen 3:15
15 And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel."
This could be interpeted as meaning anything, and you know it Photizo.
This is what biblical scholar Mathew Henry says of it:
(2.) He is to be for ever looked upon as a venomous noxious creature, and a proper object of hatred and detestation: I will put enmity between thee and the woman. The inferior creatures being made for man, it was a curse upon any of them to be turned against man and man against them; and this is part of the serpent's curse. The serpent is hurtful to man, and often bruises his heel, because it can reach no higher; nay, notice is taken of his biting the horses' heels, Gen 49:17. But man is victorious over the serpent, and bruises his head, that is, gives him a mortal wound, aiming to destroy the whole generation of vipers. It is the effect of this curse upon the serpent that, though that creature is subtle and very dangerous, yet it prevails not (as it would if God gave it commission) to the destruction of mankind.
These 4 verses you have given me do anything but prophesize a "Messiah" or "redeemer of all men." No mention of a "Son of God" is made. No mention of a "Redeemer" or "Saviour" is made.
You're telling me that out of the entire writings of Moses in Genesis-Deuteronomy, no mention of a "saviour," "redeemer," "Messiah," or "Son of God" is made? All you could come up with is four weak verses which in way refer to a "redeemer of all mankind" or a "Son of God?"
Also, last time I checked the "Son of God" was named Jesus, not Shiloh.
Now if Moses had written something like the following, then you may have a case:
Genesis 73:21
And a Messiah shall be born to this world in the coming days. He shall be the only Son of God, and shall die for the sins of all mankind. This man will die on the tree in Gethsemane.
Now that would be a prophesy. Not some BS which could clearly be interpreted as anything.
17 "I see Him, but not now;
I behold Him, but not near;
a Star shall come out of Jacob;
a Scepter shall rise out of Israel,
And batter the brow of Moab,
And destroy all the sons of tumult.
NKJV
"Although the writer -or editor- of the book of Numbers seems to have had king Josiah in mind when he composed these lines, from the second century onward, this text was interpreted as a prediction of the coming of the Messiah."
http://www.livius.org/men-mh/messiah/messiah_11.html
Hmmmmmm, sounds familiar.
_________________________________________________________
Deut 18:15
15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren.
Wow, for a minute there I thought Moses was talking about Mohammad. Notice that he uses the word "Prophet," to describe this person. Not "Son of God," not "Messiah."
Photizo, was Jesus just another "Prophet" like the Quran says and like Moses describes him as being?
___________________________________________________
Gen 49:9-12
9 Judah is a lion's whelp;
From the prey, my son, you have gone up.
He bows down, he lies down as a lion;
And as a lion, who shall rouse him?
Notice here how the "he" and "him" are referring to Judah. Jacob here starts referring to Judah with the pronouns "he" and "him" from this point on.
10 The scepter shall not depart from Judah,
Nor a lawgiver from between his feet,
Until Shiloh comes;
And to Him shall be the obedience of the people.
11 Binding his donkey to the vine,
And his donkey's colt to the choice vine,
He washed his garments in wine,
And his clothes in the blood of grapes.
12 His eyes are darker than wine,
And his teeth whiter than
NKJV
The he and him are still referring to Judah, not Jesus.
"till he come to Shiloh;" and the LXX Greek, "until that which is his shall come to Shiloh."
While some Christian interpreters believe Gen. 49:10 to be a prophecy of Jesus, some Muslims interpret it as a prophecy of Muhammad, and likewise, some Rastafarians have associated the name with the return of Haile Selassie I.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shiloh_(Biblical)
Here is the New International Version's translation:
Gen 49:10
10 The scepter will not depart from Judah,
nor the ruler's staff from between his feet,
until he comes to whom it belongs
and the obedience of the nations is his.
NIV
Hmmmmmm, sounds like its still talking about Judah to me.
_________________________________________________
Gen 3:15
15 And I will put enmity
Between you and the woman,
And between your seed and her Seed;
He shall bruise your head,
And you shall bruise His heel."
This could be interpeted as meaning anything, and you know it Photizo.
This is what biblical scholar Mathew Henry says of it:
(2.) He is to be for ever looked upon as a venomous noxious creature, and a proper object of hatred and detestation: I will put enmity between thee and the woman. The inferior creatures being made for man, it was a curse upon any of them to be turned against man and man against them; and this is part of the serpent's curse. The serpent is hurtful to man, and often bruises his heel, because it can reach no higher; nay, notice is taken of his biting the horses' heels, Gen 49:17. But man is victorious over the serpent, and bruises his head, that is, gives him a mortal wound, aiming to destroy the whole generation of vipers. It is the effect of this curse upon the serpent that, though that creature is subtle and very dangerous, yet it prevails not (as it would if God gave it commission) to the destruction of mankind.
These 4 verses you have given me do anything but prophesize a "Messiah" or "redeemer of all men." No mention of a "Son of God" is made. No mention of a "Redeemer" or "Saviour" is made.
You're telling me that out of the entire writings of Moses in Genesis-Deuteronomy, no mention of a "saviour," "redeemer," "Messiah," or "Son of God" is made? All you could come up with is four weak verses which in way refer to a "redeemer of all mankind" or a "Son of God?"
Also, last time I checked the "Son of God" was named Jesus, not Shiloh.
Now if Moses had written something like the following, then you may have a case:
Genesis 73:21
And a Messiah shall be born to this world in the coming days. He shall be the only Son of God, and shall die for the sins of all mankind. This man will die on the tree in Gethsemane.
Now that would be a prophesy. Not some BS which could clearly be interpreted as anything.
Last edited:
And how long did this take? How many years? Where are these lakes now?
The many layers of Sedimentary Rock in the Grand Canyon were definetly not formed by a huge flood or "two huge lakes." Here's how the many layers of sediment in the Grand Canyon were really formed:
"The sediments that covered the roots of these ancient mountains were deposited by a series of advancing and retreating ocean coast lines. As the climate of our planet warms and cools the median sea level of the planet rises and falls due to the melting and freezing of the polar caps. When the sea level rises, land areas which are close to the coast and relatively low in altitude are sometimes submerged. This was the case with the land area of the Grand Canyon and is why so many different sedimentary rock layers exist. Each of these was formed by a different period in which the ocean moved in and covered the land, stayed for a while, and then retreated again. Limestone deposits are created when the ocean moves in and slates, shales and mudstone deposits are created when the ocean moves out and the area is covered by silts washing into the retreating ocean."
http://www.kaibab.org/geology/gc_geol.htm#how
There's a nice lesson in geology for you there, Ice. I hope you learned something.
Not to mention, spidergoat said this:
"IceAgeCivilizations,
Your assumption seems to be that there must have been a worldwide flood, due to the presence of sedimentary rock all around the world.
I have a different explanation. As you say, rivers bring sediment from the continents to the bottom of the oceans, where they form layers. If there was one worldwide flood, there would be one layer of sediment evenly spread around the planet. Even though it might have formed distinct bands as it settled out, these characteristics would be about the same wherever we found this layer. There is no evidence for such a layer.
Instead, we find many different kinds of sediment, depending on where it eroded from. Some places accumulate chalk.
The layers in the grand canyon are not uniform, as if formed from the same stuff, there are sometimes gaps of millions of years in successive layers. This is because another layer did form, was eroded away over millions of years, and another formed on top of that.
Also, a worldwide flood would have floated off the ice caps in Greenland and Antarctica. They could not have reformed in such a short time. The evidence is in the seasonal layers of ice and bubbles which go back more than 160,000 years.
To prove a global flood could have happened, you need a theory that allows two or more layers in the ice to form each year, a process that is not occurring in modern times."
So, how do you manage to maintain your constant vigilance photizo?
How do we know Plato wrote the Republic?
So you admit Jesus was just a Prophet then, not the Son of God or the Redeemer of all of mankind?
Why do you think He was a prophet?
15 "The LORD your God will raise up for you a Prophet like me from your midst, from your brethren.
Moses said he was. I'm asking Photizo whether he agrees with Moses.
Yes, and later the author says "species," and then later he uses "phyla."
What is the supposed evidence that fish can turn into humans?
Studies of proteins proved that fish change into humans?
And what supposed "faunal successions?"
And what supposed "faunal successions?"
Like the Bird-Dino connection for example:
Here's a few examples of bird-dino connection evidence I just ripped off of wiki:
'Feathered dinosaurs are regarded by many paleontologists as transitional fossils between birds and dinosaurs (see Dinosaur-bird connection). It was already well known that ancient birds such as Archaeopteryx had many saurian characteristics, such as claws on their 'fingers' and teeth. For many years it had been theorized that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. In the late 1990s, discoveries of feathered dinosaurs provided conclusive evidence of the connection, though the genealogical details are still incomplete."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs
"The current scientific consensus holds that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. Using the strict phylogenetic definition of a clade as all descendants of a single last common ancestor, modern birds are dinosaurs and dinosaurs are, therefore, not extinct."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur-bird_connection
Here's a few examples of bird-dino connection evidence I just ripped off of wiki:
'Feathered dinosaurs are regarded by many paleontologists as transitional fossils between birds and dinosaurs (see Dinosaur-bird connection). It was already well known that ancient birds such as Archaeopteryx had many saurian characteristics, such as claws on their 'fingers' and teeth. For many years it had been theorized that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. In the late 1990s, discoveries of feathered dinosaurs provided conclusive evidence of the connection, though the genealogical details are still incomplete."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feathered_dinosaurs
"The current scientific consensus holds that birds evolved from theropod dinosaurs. Using the strict phylogenetic definition of a clade as all descendants of a single last common ancestor, modern birds are dinosaurs and dinosaurs are, therefore, not extinct."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dinosaur-bird_connection