A Bunch of Reasons Why I Question Noah's Flood Story:

[Subduction Zone]

To be honest with you, I believe you are misplacing (by that I mean misunderstanding) the context of those scriptures you quote as if they dissolve the meaning of the Bible. So--have a nice day wherever you are.

Perhaps. But there are clear contradictions. For example the boy that was made king at two different ages.

 

[robocop (actually)]

To have a history and identity is a gift from God? Can you wrap your mind around how that flat fails to the atheist? We are biological beings; we are born, we reproduce, we do things, we die, we possess memories as a part of our biology. So with or without god, we would have a history.

To a theist or an atheist, the other can flaw flat I was just answering the question.

 

[robocop (actually)]

Nope.

From my perspective, yes.

 

[YoursTrue]

"Atheists" don't say the Bible has been edited over the centuries. Scholars and historians do. It is amusing how the theist consistently blame the atheist for things they don't like.

The Bible is full of contradictions. If one can't see that and accept that, then they are stricken with a sound case of Cognitive dissonance.

If you believed the Bible were true you'd believe in God, right? Or at least recognize there is a God. So let's say you believed there is the God as the one that Abraham, Isaac and Jacob worshipped. That wouldn't make you an atheist, but it would give you a choice as to how you feel about him.

 

[Faithofchristian]

I don't see what the problem is. Look at the scripture that should explain it. There's more, but that's a start to undertanding it:
Genesis 10 -
This is the account of Noah’s sons Shem, Ham, and Japheth, who also had sons after the flood.2The sons of Japheth:
Gomer, Magog, Madai, Javan, Tubal, Meshech, and Tiras.3The sons of Gomer:
Ashkenaz, Riphath, and Togarmah.4And the sons of Javan:
Elishah, Tarshish, the Kittites, and the Rodanites.a 5From these, the maritime peoples separated into their territories, according to their languages, by clans within their nations."

Some people claim to be Christian, go to church, like their church, etc., but make fun of the Bible, right? I hope this helps to explain how these "isles" got inhabited. Perhaps you don't quite see that for some reason(?)

Not at all does it explain how the Isles of the Gentiles survived the flood of Noah's,.

 

[YoursTrue]

Not at all does it explain how the Isles of the Gentiles survived the flood of Noah's,.

The waters flooding the earth had abated, groups started, offspring of Noah's family that survived the deluge. If you look at the various translations about this, you'll notice that not every translation has "Isles of the Gentiles," but it also explains that it was obviously quite some time after the waters receded:

Genesis 10:5
New International Version
(From these the maritime peoples spread out into their territories by their clans within their nations, each with its own language.)

New Living Translation
Their descendants became the seafaring peoples that spread out to various lands, each identified by its own language, clan, and national identity.

English Standard Version
From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.

Berean Study Bible
From these, the maritime peoples separated into their territories, according to their languages, by clans within their nations.

King James Bible
By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.

 

[metis]

Not at all does it explain how the Isles of the Gentiles survived the flood of Noah's,.

Easy. There was no literal flood whereas all Earth was covered. It's clearly a myth, which doesn't mean nor imply falsehood, that has significant elements of basic Judaism within it-- iow, "the moral(s) of the story".

 

[Faithofchristian]

Easy. There was no literal flood whereas all Earth was covered. It's clearly a myth, which doesn't mean nor imply falsehood, that has significant elements of basic Judaism within it-- iow, "the moral(s) of the story".

Your called into question by your own question..
Before you can say it's all myth..what proof do you have that the flood being a myth.

 

[Faithofchristian]

Easy. There was no literal flood whereas all Earth was covered. It's clearly a myth, which doesn't mean nor imply falsehood, that has significant elements of basic Judaism within it-- iow, "the moral(s) of the story".

Your called into question by your own question..
Before you can say it's all myth..what proof do you have that the flood being a myth.

 

[Faithofchristian]

The waters flooding the earth had abated, groups started, offspring of Noah's family that survived the deluge. If you look at the various translations about this, you'll notice that not every translation has "Isles of the Gentiles," but it also explains that it was obviously quite some time after the waters receded:

Genesis 10:5
New International Version
(From these the maritime peoples spread out into their territories by their clans within their nations, each with its own language.)

New Living Translation
Their descendants became the seafaring peoples that spread out to various lands, each identified by its own language, clan, and national identity.

English Standard Version
From these the coastland peoples spread in their lands, each with his own language, by their clans, in their nations.

Berean Study Bible
From these, the maritime peoples separated into their territories, according to their languages, by clans within their nations.

King James Bible
By these were the isles of the Gentiles divided in their lands; every one after his tongue, after their families, in their nations.

What groups.. everything was to be destedest by the flood of Noah's..

Therefore where did the Isles of the Gentiles come from..
And it sure wasn't by Noah's sons or grandsons..
Seeing the Isles of the Gentiles were already there..

 

[gnostic]

Your called into question by your own question..
Before you can say it's all myth..what proof do you have that the flood being a myth.

You really don't know what you are talking about.

There are too many problem with literal interpretations of Genesis Flood, because it defy reality and defy nature.

In Genesis Flood it say it covered all the highest mountains, but the only mountains mentioned - Ararat. It took 150 days for the waters to reach maximum, and 150 days for all that water to recede.

If we were to say it did covered the summit of Ararat's tallest peak - the Greater Ararat - that would mean 5100 metres.

The Genesis Flood is ridiculous and unfounded on so many levels.

For one, where do water come from and where do they go.

If such flood occurred, it would changed the sea level catastrophically.

Under normal circumstances, there are flooding in some localized areas, all around, don’t effect the sea level much. If the sea level rise even 1 metre in a single year, it may years or even centuries before return to the same level before the rise.

So can you imagine if the sea level rise by over 5 km?

Sea level don’t rise in 150 days, then drop magically in 150 days, like Genesis 8 say.

Two.

According to Genesis 8, a dove brought back a twig from a olive tree, 150 days after cover the peak of Ararat.

Remember, the tallest peak of Ararat is over 5100 metres.

Do you know what a crushing depth or collapse depth is?

Most civilian-built submarines cannot withstand depth of over 100 metres before crushing the submarines.

There are specially designed and built research submarines and military built submarines that can go much deeper, but they are very costly to build.

But if a normal and cheaply built submarine cannot be submerged 100-plus metre, can you even imagine what water pressures do in 100-metre depth, let alone 5000-metre depth, would do plant life, including olive trees.

No land vegetation could survive crushing depth over 5 km.

Three.

Most marine life would survive such depth.

Most fishes you catch to eat, don’t swim so deep; most inhabited certain depth. Changing that, would cause extinction of those fishes.

Plus corals only survive only shallow depth of the sea, and additional 5 km of water on top of the original sea level, would cause extinctions of corals. Corals are also dependent on the temperature level of sea water, as well as salient levels and acidity level, for their survival: changing any of those factors would kill most corals.

Four.

The ark itself is ridiculous too large to be seaworthy, and too small to contain all the land animals, plus the water and food needed for over 300 days aboard the ark?

How do keep all these animals warm, because no known ancient vessels won’t leak. So the ark would be damp and cold?

And predators and carnivores need to eat, and they usually would eat their preys. Carnivores don’t become herbivores overnight, then return to being carnivores after the flood.

And what would carnivores eat after leaving the ark: they would meat, Faithofchristian? So they would begin hunting those leaving the ark, then they would starve.

And that lead to five.

There are many animals that don’t run fast, and don’t travel far.

I lived in Australia, and there are species of animals that are only native to Australia. So how do marsupials travelled from Ararat to Australia?

Sure kangaroos and dingoes can possibly make such journeys, but what of much slower moving marsupials?

For instance, the koalas. How would they survive treks of tens of thousands of kilometres to reach Australia? They spend most of their lives living on eucalyptus trees, feeding on leaves. They don’t spend much times on ground. Such a trek would kill them, if they don’t get kill and eaten by predators.

The whole idea that only two of very wild kinds, is the most stupidest thing that that Genesis can write about. It is totally unrealistic fairytale.

Predators and carnivores hunt for their food, and koalas are known for being to escape predators, and you are forgetting that some predators (cats, big and small) are great at climbing trees.

So many things that the ancient writers are unaware of, that I have listed above, that we are aware of today, and if taken literally, it make the Genesis unrealistic nonsense that no one would believe.

 

[Faithofchristian]

You really don't know what you are talking about.

In Genesis Flood it say it covered all the highest mountains, but the only mountains mentioned - Ararat. It took 150 days for the waters to reach maximum, and 150 days for all that water to recede.

If we were to say it did covered the summit of Ararat's tallest peak - the Greater Ararat - that would mean 5100 metres.

The Genesis Flood is ridiculous and unfounded on so many levels.

For one, where do water come from and where do they go.

If such flood occurred, it would changed the sea level catastrophically.

Under normal circumstances, there are flooding in some localized areas, all around, don’t effect the sea level much. If the sea level rise even 1 metre in a single year, it may years or even centuries before return to the same level before the rise.

So can you imagine if the sea level rise by over 5 km?

Sea level don’t rise in 150 days, then drop magically in 150 days, like Genesis 8 say.

Two.

According to Genesis 8, a dove brought back a twig from a olive tree, 150 days after cover the peak of Ararat.

Remember, the tallest peak of Ararat is over 5100 metres.

Do you know what a crushing depth or collapse depth is?

Most civilian-built submarines cannot withstand depth of over 100 metres before crushing the submarines.

There are specially designed and built research submarines and military built submarines that can go much deeper, but they are very costly to build.

But if a normal and cheaply built submarine cannot be submerged 100-plus metre, can you even imagine what water pressures do in 100-metre depth, let alone 5000-metre depth, would do plant life, including olive trees.

No land vegetation could survive crushing depth over 5 km.

Three.

Most marine life would survive such depth.

Most fishes you catch to eat, don’t swim so deep; most inhabited certain depth. Changing that, would cause extinction of those fishes.

Plus corals only survive only shallow depth of the sea, and additional 5 km of water on top of the original sea level, would cause extinctions of corals. Corals are also dependent on the temperature level of sea water, as well as salient levels and acidity level, for their survival: changing any of those factors would kill most corals.

Four.

The ark itself is ridiculous too large to be seaworthy, and too small to contain all the land animals, plus the water and food needed for over 300 days aboard the ark?

How do keep all these animals warm, because no known ancient vessels won’t leak. So the ark would be damp and cold?

And predators and carnivores need to eat, and they usually would eat their preys. Carnivores don’t become herbivores overnight, then return to being carnivores after the flood.

And what would carnivores eat after leaving the ark: they would meat, Faithofchristian? So they would begin hunting those leaving the ark, then they would starve.

And that lead to five.

There are many animals that don’t run fast, and don’t travel far.

I lived in Australia, and there are species of animals that are only native to Australia. So how do marsupials travelled from Ararat to Australia?

Sure kangaroos and dingoes can possibly make such journeys, but what of much slower moving marsupials?

For instance, the koalas. How would they survive treks of tens of thousands of kilometres to reach Australia? They spend most of their lives living on eucalyptus trees, feeding on leaves. They don’t spend much times on ground. Such a trek would kill them, if they don’t get kill and eaten by predators.

The whole idea that only two of very wild kinds, is the most stupidest thing that that Genesis can write about. It is totally unrealistic fairytale.

Predators and carnivores hunt for their food, and koalas are known for being to escape predators, and you are forgetting that some predators (cats, big and small) are great at climbing trees.

So many things that the ancient writers are unaware of, that I have listed above, that we are aware of today, make the Genesis unrealistic nonsenses that no one would believe.

You know there was a much greater flood than the flood of Noah's..

In Genesis 1:2, here in we find the Spirit of God mover upon the face of the waters,

And then in Verse 9, here we find God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place and let the dry land appear..
So here we find the flood of waters did cover the whole earth...
For the waters were gathered into one place..which are the seas.
And the dry land which is the Earth..

Therefore the flood Noah's can not even compare to the first flood of waters that did cover the whole earth..

In the old testament Scriptures and the New testament Scriptures give account of the first flood of waters that covered the whole Earth.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Your called into question by your own question..
Before you can say it's all myth..what proof do you have that the flood being a myth.

The evidence against the flood is endless. The evidence for it is nonexistent. Unfortunately you may not even understand the concept of evidence.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You know there was a much greater flood than the flood of Noah's..

In Genesis 1:2, here in we find the Spirit of God mover upon the face of the waters,

And then in Verse 9, here we find God said, Let the waters under the heaven be gathered together unto one place and let the dry land appear..
So here we find the flood of waters did cover the whole earth...
For the waters were gathered into one place..which are the seas.
And the dry land which is the Earth..

Therefore the flood Noah's can not even compare to the first flood of waters that did cover the whole earth..

In the old testament Scriptures and the New testament Scriptures give account of the first flood of waters that covered the whole Earth.

That is merely more myth in the Bible. The Bible is not the evidence. The Bible is the claim. You need to go outside of the Bible to find evidence for or against an idea in it.

 

[rational experiences]

As a psychic the human mind brain that always said I heard voices speaking telling me. After our saviour existed gods saviour ice returned reborn end of year year saved life.

A human just thinking like all natural humans. Spiritual and healthy. Not any evil being or any ark UFO Phi fake theory. Seeing is a living human is living looking seeing to make up false stories.

What we said is science.

As natural never needed science actually it was forced onto us.

By history human bullies and murdering humans. A fact. Of how and why and what for.

A human says I know so they experiment. As they don't know. Yet says I will know as I am a God.

The reality of humans.

So they look for little.

Humans little bodies sperm and an ovary.

Science looks at what they claim is gods little bodies. Not his own.

Then they come up with a fake machine thesis about I will know what a God is. So I can have it. Use it. Burn and destroy it as. Resource.

Actually I tell everyone God is electricity.

Yet two naturally pre owned forms of God I personally destroyed to get electricity.

Is the bible theist himself. Just a human.

So natural science says thunder only happens when it's raining.

Relevant to that theist.

Burning gods spirit as a satanist gets flooding rain.

He wants thunder and lightning.

The flood thesis.

Flooding rain over the mountains that radiation mass as it's ark status hit. Saved life. As it rained by a human counting for forty days

Now who owns human DNA genesis itself?

A living human does.

Whose human DNA got saved because the flooding rain cooled burning gases? You know Satanists ice melted! Our saviour. Four seasons one of which is what? Not a season.

Hot humid a constant. Four seasons a natural O earths holy Cross status of two constantly. + Two constantly holy present a sea son.

Once a hot humid dinosaur living climate existed. All that life was gone by ice snap freeze.

Maybe if you remove all the ice the dinosaurs will come back to life in a time shifting earth thesis about genetics. Too bad about the huge earth reaction however that killed the dinosaurs.

As ice was a reaction you know involving gases burning.

 

[YoursTrue]

What groups.. everything was to be destedest by the flood of Noah's..

Therefore where did the Isles of the Gentiles come from..
And it sure wasn't by Noah's sons or grandsons..
Seeing the Isles of the Gentiles were already there..

Not sure I understand your reasoning on this. The waters receded and obviously some lands dried out. That chapter is very interesting in that it explains about the descendants of Noah's sons. Spreading out as generations went by.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Not sure I understand your reasoning on this. The waters receded and obviously some lands dried out. That chapter is very interesting in that it explains about the descendants of Noah's sons. Spreading out as generations went by.

Where would the water recede to in the flood myth?

 

[Faithofchristian]

Not sure I understand your reasoning on this. The waters receded and obviously some lands dried out. That chapter is very interesting in that it explains about the descendants of Noah's sons. Spreading out as generations went by.

Noah's descendants were not Gentiles..
If however they were Gentiles it would not make any sense...
It was Noah's grandsons that went in the Isles of the Gentiles..
So the question still remains.
Where did the Gentiles come from..
If the flood of Noah's was supposedly covered the whole Earth..
So where did the Gentiles come from in
Genesis 10:5 ????

 

[rational experiences]

Where would the water recede to in the flood myth?

The statement is misread. As human theists want God by genesis to quote science and God the power created life as a scientific human thesis.

Is the first relative human coercive advice. To be warned humans did it to themselves but God the earth owned all causes. Man's sin against himself.

Subjective to its human teacher.

The theist just a hu man pre owns a human want that motivates human reasoning. Not on truth but by want as a human pre existing motivation...control power of God and human living conditions.

They wanted UFO ark sun history to have been earths conceived of life in water.

As a visionary psychic I was shown planet earths flood as origin status. Vision like watching a movie. No land whatsoever above water.

I accepted the vision as a natural recording. Recording does not lie. Humans however lie.

So science study said when the sun attacked earth its facure melted earth god was converted. The origin flood. Water by flood had sealed off saved planet earths body.

Science said why water was sealed inside of stones opened mass. Part of a human bible teaching. Water was seen magically coming out of stone.

Nothing to do with the story Noah's Ark the human experience.

As a flooded ground allows no life on the ground to live until water bared naked the grounds body. For ground life is a human sciences teaching.

Mother earth became naked before life of the garden emerged the body covering of stones nakedness.

Then nature's garden having no human relationship grew.

The holy tree atmospheric oxygenator.

Relative conscious human teaching how did you know oxygen advice?

My oxygen was the trees owned. Was never waters status. Tree of life warning in science.

The scientific warning. For humans.

The bible about human Satanists who chose to ignore the natural relativity advice that God earth had taught them.

Ignoring a human theist teaching as humans is in fact a liar. By coercive status. When earths God warnings were planetary warnings. One.

The teaching about false preaching.

So when a natural human says the Noah story was human science advice for humans they were telling the truth. Burn the heavens gases by stone ark nuclear human theory and proof is it floods.

Where does flooding water go. Into the sea.

The sea level rises by ice melt but by flooding rain also.

So cities once built using technology sink under the sea flood.

Which is how the flood spread out amongst humanity and placed its cities collectively under the water flood. Inherited cause effect by human chosen nuclear sciences.

As humans witnessing the irradiation sacrifice of human DNA notated all evidences. The flooding rain covered the faces of mt Sinai blackened scorched face by UFO radiation and Ararat with a cloud veil coverage until the mountain face cooled.

Notated by a forty day ground flooding event. With large atmospheric reactive lightning thunder. Man's invented lighting cause. Yet God heavens owned the reaction.

Noah's Ark man of sciences confession. As Sion to convert God as conversion is his themed grail.

O earth was first God a planet only as a body mass. Stone.

DNA genesis was saved humans and animals lived after. Were mutated so their new born babies are as firstborn dead. Or babies were just born dead by irradiation causes. Unable to survive due to mutations. Genesis exodus.

Natural history. Science causes.

Life bio water boarded the ark by image the cloud teaching cause.

Reason life's ground natural water body split off the ground as a mass sheeting effect converted into extra clouds to cool earths gases burning in the heavens.

Wrote the story as humans as they witnessed the phenomena as humans.

 

[rational experiences]

Noah's descendants were not Gentiles..
If however they were Gentiles it would not make any sense...
It was Noah's grandsons that went in the Isles of the Gentiles..
So the question still remains.
Where did the Gentiles come from..
If the flood of Noah's was supposedly covered the whole Earth..
So where did the Gentiles come from in
Genesis 10:5 ????

Only believe in one word God and don't believe in false preaching human science theisms is the human Christ teaching. For humans as humans.