What did carnivores eat after the flood?

[otseng]

Quarkhead asked a good question. So I'm creating a new topic here to address it.

After all the animals stepped off Noah's ark, what did the carnivores eat? All the (land) animals perished in a world-wide flood. So the only animals that carnivores could eat were those that stepped off the boat. Wouldn't they have all eaten each other? And also what did the carnivores eat while they were in the ark?

[Christanity4ever]

Hi
I hope you don't mind my entering the ring? I've been lurking and watching things progress.

I don't mind to enter Daniels lion pit for the secular lions are quite toothless.

Circular reasoning offers such a comforting place for discourse doesn't it? Have you ever - even once - considered why your holy book is more correct than that of someone else (e.g. Muslim, Sikh, Mormon)?

Yes of course I have. Well the Koran fairly mimics the bible in the first few books. However as for the other faiths they may be true I think we worship the same God even if the others don't know it! I use the validity of prophesy and the archeological evidence, the idea that there was a creation event instead of a eternal static universe as per secular science. Stuff like that . I doubt that you will accept any of it and have debated all of it many times. Evidence covers a lot of ground, from circumstantial to eye witness to hard tangible evidence. So I use evidence for the existence of God that covers at least two and maybe all of those evdiences listed...

Are you relying on the apparently greater intensity of your faith over that other person in convincing yourself that his/her scriptures are inaccurate? i.e. Would his/her scripture be more accurate than your own if he/she had a greater level of faith than you? Is there a chance that if his/her level of faith is indeed more than your own - your bible is wrong?

No faith has no bearing on the validity of the other faiths. However faith has everything to do with personal belief and that is the first step in any religion. I also think pure faith which vanished with Jesus can move mountains and manifest other supernatural events. But I feel in the church age supernatural miracles etc do not exist or if they do they are exceedingly rare. In the latter days I think the power of supernatural will again become real as per scripture. Today we the church is the body of Christ and that means its up to us to move mountains and do Gods will in a non metaphysical way.

I'd appreciate it if you could identify one of these times. In my experience these events that provide evidence to support the creation story (pick whatever one you wish) are typically the result of apologists force-fitting the work of scientists and other professionals to fit their respective scriptures..

There is no force fitting. The bible tells the creation story in parable. It could just of easily of said the Universe the earth and everything has always existed. But no as per scripture the eternal God caused the universe to begin to exist from the void.

For the sake of clarity . . . CBer?

I am sorry I post in several forums. That is my construction and it means Christian Basher. Thanks for your reply....

C-4

[Grumpy]

Christanity4ever

the idea that there was a creation event instead of a eternal static universe as per secular science.

Where you got that idea, I do not know. The Big Bang is the accepted theory of the beginning of the Universe and time. We KNOW the Universe is not static or eternal, we've known this for decades. It was the church which claimed the heavens were perfect and fixed.

Grumpy

[Goat]

I also believe that prophesy is true and has been fulfilled and is being fulfilled. One of my atheist friends asked me why biblical prophesy was so vague, and why it couldn't be very detailed. My answer is if prophesy were exceedingly detailed we would have no freewill because that detailed prophesy must pass and it must do so with detail. That seems to me would take away our ability to choose.

C4

I find that biblical prophecy , as defined by Christians, involves taking passages out of context, writing TO the passages rather than the passages being prophecy to begin with, and mistranslations. It is easy to write a full fillment of a prophecy if you take passages out of context. You can take passage to make Elvis be the messiah,or even a chicken!.

[Cathar1950]

I also believe that prophesy is true and has been fulfilled and is being fulfilled. One of my atheist friends asked me why biblical prophesy was so vague, and why it couldn't be very detailed. My answer is if prophesy were exceedingly detailed we would have no freewill because that detailed prophesy must pass and it must do so with detail. That seems to me would take away our ability to choose.

C4

I find that biblical prophecy , as defined by Christians, involves taking passages out of context, writing TO the passages rather than the passages being prophecy to begin with, and mistranslations. It is easy to write a full fillment of a prophecy if you take passages out of context. You can take passage to make Elvis be the messiah,or even a chicken!.

Reading the so called prophecy is the NT it is clear they are not prophesying.

But how does having vague prophesies interfere with free will any more then detailed ones? The prophesy should happen despite what is chosen. If they knew the details would that limit God?

[Atrax Robustus]

I use the validity of prophesy and the archeological evidence, the idea that there was a creation event instead of a eternal static universe as per secular science. Stuff like that . I doubt that you will accept any of it and have debated all of it many times. Evidence covers a lot of ground, from circumstantial to eye witness to hard tangible evidence. So I use evidence for the existence of God that covers at least two and maybe all of those evdiences listed...

I'd like to discuss your cited validity of prophesy and the archeological evidence, but you haven't provided any examples. I hope I'm misreading your intent here, however does your doubt regarding my acceptance of this evidence provide you with a reason to deny me the opportunity to examine it?

I'd appreciate it if you could identify one of these times. In my experience these events that provide evidence to support the creation story (pick whatever one you wish) are typically the result of apologists force-fitting the work of scientists and other professionals to fit their respective scriptures..

There is no force fitting. The bible tells the creation story in parable. It could just of easily of said the Universe the earth and everything has always existed. But no as per scripture the eternal God caused the universe to begin to exist from the void.

Point taken - however you have not provided an example of the supporting evidence that you have found so compelling. Again, while you have assessed my unwillinglness to accept this evidence, I reckon it's a poor reason to deny someone the opportunity to at least consider it on its respective merits.

Rather than continue with this obvious derailing of a lengthy thread, would you be willing to discuss this evidence under a separate thread?