Tweet
Re: Does FM Have a New Van?
And here's some literature to go with it
& click header icon for xlnt bleating lamb with rotating head
click image for typical interior
Originally posted by Harsha Shah
View Post
& click header icon for xlnt bleating lamb with rotating head
http://objectiveministries.org/creation/kangaroo.html
As you can see, the logic is inescapable -- Kangaroos must have once lived in the Middle East. Any claim that they didn't must then be treated as refuted. But still there are questions that are left to be investigated. For instance: why are there no kangaroos left in the Middle East? how come we do not hear of kangaroos in the histories of the region? and how did the kangaroos get to Australia?
First, let me point out that the word "kangaroo" was coined by the Australian Aborigines after both they and the kangaroos had migrated to the Australian continent (which, at the time, was still indirectly connected to the Middle East, see inset). The word kangaroo means "I don't know" in Aboriginese. The story goes that when the first modern Europeans arrived in Australia, they saw a large hopping animal and asked one of the natives what it was called. "Kangaroo [I don't know]," he responded. It is understandable that he couldn't name the animal since his people had lost all knowledge of their Biblical heritage and thus would not have known the name given to the animal by Adam (Gen 2:19). Obviously, the peoples of the Middle East would not have called these animals by the name "kangaroo", and so the naive assertion of Biblical skeptics that since the word "kangaroo" is absent from the ancient Middle East so too must the kangaroo be, is patently absurd.
That kangaroos are not mentioned in the Genesis account of the Flood, either by name or description, is unsurprising due to the great number of kinds of animals that were in the Ararat area at the time. What's a kangaroo or two among a great throng of pandas, mastodons, velociraptors, and giraffes? It is also likely that the kangaroos only spent a relatively short time living in the Middle East, needing to leave with greater haste than other animals in order to reach their appointed destination before the breakup of Pangaea (see next section).
As you can see, the logic is inescapable -- Kangaroos must have once lived in the Middle East. Any claim that they didn't must then be treated as refuted. But still there are questions that are left to be investigated. For instance: why are there no kangaroos left in the Middle East? how come we do not hear of kangaroos in the histories of the region? and how did the kangaroos get to Australia?
That kangaroos are not mentioned in the Genesis account of the Flood, either by name or description, is unsurprising due to the great number of kinds of animals that were in the Ararat area at the time. What's a kangaroo or two among a great throng of pandas, mastodons, velociraptors, and giraffes? It is also likely that the kangaroos only spent a relatively short time living in the Middle East, needing to leave with greater haste than other animals in order to reach their appointed destination before the breakup of Pangaea (see next section).
Comment