Noah’s Ark: Was It Possible?
Atheists, agnostics, unbelievers and liberal scholars have all scoffed at the biblical account of Noah’s ark and the Flood. But their criticisms rest on some mistaken assumptions.
by Arnold Mendez
Many people today are under the false assumption that Noah’s ark could not possibly have carried all of its intended cargo. They believe that any such ship would have needed to be of gargantuan proportions—far exceeding the dimensions recorded in Genesis or the supposedly primitive technology of the ancient world.
Those who scoff at the Genesis story often picture the ark as a small vessel, complete with the giraffes’ heads sticking out the front and the elephants’ tails hanging out the back, sinking under the weight of an overloaded cargo of millions of animals. But this concept is based on several misconceptions.
Even a cursory reading of the sixth chapter of Genesis will reveal some often overlooked, but very important details. The Bible nowhere states that Noah had to take on board the ark representatives of every living creature. There were three requirements for the animals to be loaded on the ark. They had to be:
- Air-breathing.
- Terrestrial (land-dwelling).
- Of the same biblical kind.
Read this early account: “And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the earth shall die . . . And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind . . .” (Genesis 6:17-20).
Biblical “kind” broader than species
The word species and the biblical word kind are often used interchangeably.
But this is incorrect since they are not synonymous terms. The Genesis use
of the word kind denotes an organism that reproduces others like itself. Since
the species concept is much narrower, many species can be included in one
single biblical “kind.” The term kind
is probably closer to the modern taxonomic classification of genus, and in
some cases the larger taxonomic classification, family.
Read the full article at www.gnmagazine.org/issues/gn47/noahsark.htm
Related Information on UCG Sites:
Table of Contents that includes "Noah's Ark: Was It Possible?"
Other Articles by Arnold Mendez
Noah:
- _Update on the Search for Noah's Ark
- _Meeting Our Moment of Maximum Jeopardy!
- _The Population Explosion and Prophecy
- _Noah and Our Time: A Sobering Parallel
- _God's Magnificent Series of Covenants
- _A Colossal Testimony to God
- _Noah: An Example of Righteousness
- _Noah's Flood: Did the Noachian Flood Cause Global Catastrophe?
- _Noah's Flood: Did It Really Happen?
- _Understanding Biblical `Kinds'
- _Was There Enough Water?
- _Was Noah's Flood Universal?
- _Evidence of a Worldwide Flood
- _Letters From Our Readers - Sep/Oct 2003
- _Question and Answers - VT Jan/Mar 2004
- _In the News Oct/Dec 2004
- _In the News Jan/Mar 2005
- _Noah: A True Noncomformist
- _Questions and Answers - Jan/Mar 2003
- _Confusion Over Noah
- _Answers from Genesis - Part 4
- _Meeting Our Moment of Maximum Jeopardy!
Key Subjects Index
General Topics Index
Biblical References Index
Good News Magazine Index
Booklets and All Literature Index
Home Page of this site


