From: "Sharon Mooney"
To: "Ed Babinski"
Sent: Monday, November 24, 2003
Subject: Re: Tree WorshipI have heard that the olive tree never dies. It will live on and on and on.
The only way you can kill it is to rip the roots out of the ground and burn them.Goes back to the myth of Noah's Flood, the only thing left alive was a fresh olive branch found in the beak of a dove that Noah had sent from the ark, thus an olive true must have survived Noah's Flood and a mile of sediment being laid down all over the earth. HA HA HA
I have always wondered about this, since the Raven was an unclean bird... why would Noah risk losing the pair? The male raven of the pair sent out? Or the female thrown out? Either way, there's no mention that the Raven came back. So it's mate would have been alone, and it doesn't qualify among the creatures brought in by sevens, because it is an unclean meat.
Gn:8:7: And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth. (KJV)
That was a really busy bird... does it say it ever returned to the ark? No.
Clean and Unclean Meats
... Clean and Unclean Food. ... since you are to detest them, you must not eat their meat and you ...
the red kite, any kind of black kite, any kind of raven, the horned owl ...Gn:6:19: And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. (KJV)
Gn:6:20: Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. (KJV)
Gn:7:2: Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. (KJV)
Gn:7:9: There went in two and two unto Noah into the ark, the male and the female, as God had commanded Noah. (KJV)
Gn:7:15: And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life. (KJV)
Gn:8:7: And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth. (KJV)
It says the raven goes to and fro until the waters dry up. Followed by
Gn:8:9: But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him into the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth: then he put forth his hand, and took her, and pulled her in unto him into the ark. (KJV)
If the Dove couldn't find a place to rest, then neither could the Raven, which went out before the Dove... common sense tells everyone, the Raven would have eventually given up on flight, and drowned in the waters. It states only the Raven goes to and fro, and doesn't return. Which is unreasonable, unless the Biblical writers know something that I don't about "Super Flight-Longevity of the Raven" So, that leaves one Raven without a mate. Ravens should be extinct... because there were only two of this unclean bird, as commanded by YHWH... and one drowned in the sea.
wait a minute "The Raven that was not" -and- "The Raven that was and still is"...
Ex:9:6: And the Lord did that thing on the morrow, and all the cattle of Egypt died: but of the cattle of the children of Israel died not one. (KJV)
All the cattle of Egypt died, but the Egyptians yet had cattle to cause to flee
Ex:9:20: He that feared the word of the Lord among the servants of Pharaoh made his servants and his cattle flee into the houses: (KJV)
Gn:8:7: And he sent forth a raven, which went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth. (KJV)
Could that have meant he constantly made trips back and forth to the Ark ?
Sounds pretty good for an explanation, but it doesn't add up with why Noah would then send out the dove, if the Raven was doing a good enough job (Noah lost his raven, and then took a chance on a Dove) --- Use a Homing Pigeon dummy! To and fro in the Bible, to mean "wandering about" --- not coming back, and sent again.
There was no Raven. There was no dove. There was no ark. and, there were no dinosaurs on the Ark. (As the YEC would probably try to say).
why do you suppose that no eggs had been laid during that time?
There's no proof or mention of offspring either on the ark. Aside of the contradictions which exist in the numbers commanded to be brought on the ark --- some verses simply state "bring them in by twos" and another verse says specifically "by sevens if they're clean"... it's a contradiction often discussed.
But to further complicate what the Bible is saying --- Creation Scientists have enough trouble fitting in all the species, mathematically, in pairs, or sevens into this ark. If you want to bring in *potential offspring* into this unbelievably already-cramped space of all the species on earth, being fitted in a tiny boat --- then go ahead.
There's a contradiction here, with some verses commanding to bring the critters in by twos, and another verse instructs to bring them in by sevens, if they're clean meat.
Most biblicists don't realize their Bible contains TWO DIFFERENT stories about Noah and the Flood, conflated into one by an editor. See: The Two Flood Stories - A Comparison of the J and P Accounts
Translation and notes by Henry E. NeufeldMessage awaits moderator approval
RELATED ARTICLES
The Bible Knows Nothing of Science
Indepth and informative critique of Noah's Ark and the worldwide flood. Further calls into question flood geology and evolution of the varities of species.The Tree of Life and Ancient Tree Worship
Ancient Cultures had great reverence for Agricultural products. Read about these ancient Trees of life, knowledge, and mystical fruit.Which Came First? The Chicken or The Egg
Finally an answer to the age-old question, which came first, the Chicken or the Egg. Read what Scientists say about this burning question. Page discusses the age of the eldest known egg fossil vs. the age when modern birds evolved. An interesting little piece of information for the evolution vs. creationism controversy.Challenge to Dr. Kent Hovind to provide empirical evidence for Creationism
Kent Hovind's so-called offer to pay $250,000 for proving evolution is true. It's already been proven true, but of course Hovind has no intention of parting with that kind of money. Ed Babinski will give 50 cents to anyone who can prove that even half of Kent Hovind's claims are correct, and that goes for his claim to have a "doctorate" degree based on a level of course completion and study that is even half as rigorous as the doctorate degrees acquired at genuine institutions of higher learning.Intelligent Design: God in the Classroom
A basic understanding of Intelligent Design, and why religious beliefs should be kept out of the classroom.Ed Conrad's "Man as old as Coal"
Ed Conrad persistently has promoted a hypothesis claiming man is as old as coal. Ed Babinski explains why the hypothesis is in error.
Article last updated October 22, 2005
Certified error free by http://htmlvalidator.com
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |