Noah and his Ark - Believe it or Not?

[gnostic]

I would say no.

As Holly said, the flood was probably localised, but if you can't see any land on the horizon, then you too would think everything is underwater. Perhaps from Noah's perspective, he thought the world was covered in water.

 

[commandment4]

I believe it is true because I believe the Bible and that it is Gods word. If God didn't do that then he's a liar. If God didn't do that then most of the other stuff in the bible probably didn't happen either. If you don't believe he could've flood the whole earth and make it possible for Noah to do what he did then how do you believe in God and the fact that he created humans. the fact that he sent his son, the resurection, or anything it says in revelation, even the fact that jesus could heal anyone. The flood doesn't seem that unbeleivable compared to the several other things mentioned in the bible. Why not say do you believe everything in the Bible. If you don't believe one thing could be real then what do you feel about the rest of the Bible?

 

[Tiberius]

If the Bible isn't God's word, it doesn't make a liar out of God. It makes a liar out of the person who said it was God's word.

If I wrote a book and said that Commandment4 wrote it, does that make you a liar? No, it makes me a liar.

 

[gnostic]

commandment4. I think you fail to realise that the book of Genesis was not written by God. It is said to written by Moses, which is traditionally attributed to him, but I don't think he wrote it.

We know that Noah, Abraham, Jacob and Joseph didn't leave any writing behind. And though, we suspect that Moses wrote down the Genesis, we can never be sure.

The way I understand it, it could be composed in two way.

1) Oral tradition. The event was passed down from generation to generation, eg father to son.

2) Inspired by God in a revelation.

For me, it is most like the 1st one - oral tradition.

There are older stories of both the creation and flood from other civilisation, written before Abraham's time, and long before Moses' time. Namely, in literature from the Sumerian and Akkadian (Babylonian) civilisations.

There are cuneiforms found on tablets which contain similar events. In Sumerian legend, the flood hero is named Ziusudra (Sumerian), Atrahasis (in Akkadian) or Uta-napishti (in Babylonian "Gilgamesh" legend). In each case, it was the Sumerian god Enki (or the Akkadian Ea), who had instructed Ziusudra to build an ark to save himself and his family. The flood was brought upon the earth by another god Enlil.

Since Abraham came out of Babylonia, in his own exodus to Canaan, it more than likely he was influenced by the Sumerian/Akkadian legend. The Nippur tablet has been dated around 2300-2200, around 3 or 4 centuries before Abraham. Moses had probably learn this legend through oral tradition and composed his own version, and in that time, the original flood legend would have change to suit the Israelites. The only time we hear of writing in the Bible for the 1st time, is the Ten Commandments.

 

[ashai]

A folk tale changes from story teller to story teller. The Bible clearly has had its share of writers and yet its fabric, continuity, direction, and purpose remains steadfastly perfect. This is unheard with a folk tale. The places change from person to person. The characters change from person to person and so does the emphasis. Moses spoke to GOD personally. He was also the prince of Egypt.

LittleNipper, Ushta!

I hate to point this out to you , but the Gospels, and Kings and Chronicles all have different descriptions of the same events ... just like? ... You got it ... folk tales!

Ushta te
Ashai
The doctrine ofthe Most Wise is to love mankind\
Denkard :dan:

 

[BruceDLimber]

The poll question is poorly designed because it reduces everything to a mere qualititative "yes" or "no," and makes no allowance for believing, for example, that the story has a spiritual message but no literal significance.

Bruce

 

[sojourner]

The poll question is poorly designed because it reduces everything to a mere qualititative "yes" or "no," and makes no allowance for believing, for example, that the story has a spiritual message but no literal significance.

Bruce

BINGO!

 

[dan]

Couple of questlons on the Noah story.

1) where is the boat?
2) How could all the animals fit on one boat?
3) How could all the animals be moved distances to get on the boat?
4) Why could a God that created life with the touch of his hand need to flood the world instead of just uncreating what he didnt' want?
5) If it rained /stormed for 40 days wouldn't there have to been a long draught first to get all that water from the oceans into the sky? I don't remember reading about a great draught in the Torah.

1) What happens to wood after thousands of years?
2) How many animals, exactly, where there?
3) What was the condition of the continents back then?
4) Because that would be counterproductive to his plan and the rules he's set down for himself.
5) Did people get their drinking water from the ocean? Remember how the Bible also says the fountains of the great deep also opened up? Are you cognizant of the conditions of the ecosystem of that time period? Do you know what time period, exactly, this was in?
6)You appear to be making judgments based on your uninformed assumptions about how things should work. Is that true?

 

[dan]

I hate to point this out to you , but the Gospels, and Kings and Chronicles all have different descriptions of the same events ... just like? ... You got it ... folk tales!

Yeah, just like Ramses II and the battle at Kadesh with the Hittites. We have accounts from the Egyptians and some from the Hittites, but none of them agree on big points (like who won). I guess that means it never happened, because if two people didn't have the exact same perspective and information about it it must not be true. We all know that every human being on earth has the exact same vision, memory, perception of space and time, as well as motivation and desires. If it were any other way then we'd have to actually inestigate stuff and not just seek out evidence that supports the preconceived notions we adhere vehemently to. It's too bad we then have to dismiss the overwhelming amount of evidence that supports the battle at Kadesh, as well as the Bible, as well as all of known history from the beginning of time to the invention of the television. Those other accounts of absolutely all of history have discrepancies in the varying acounts, so we have to conclude that it was all made up. The Boston Massacre, for example, never really happened. Sure, five people appear to have stopped existing, according to the state records, but since there are so many different accounts of how, exactly, it happened, it must be a folk tale. Stupid Paul Revere and his proclivity for inventing massacres only to promulgate his political ideals. Tisk, tisk.

 

[Brother Jeffrey]

I wonder, does the belief in the story of Noah, or disbelief, change the truth of what actually happened, or didn't happen.

 

[ChrisP]

I wonder, does the belief in the story of Noah, or disbelief, change the truth of what actually happened, or didn't happen.

I wonder... why you have the zig zag guy for an avatar

Blues or Yellows :biglaugh:

 

[Brother Jeffrey]

I wonder... why you have the zig zag guy for an avatar

Blues or Yellows :biglaugh:

That's not zag-man, that's Jesus.
Whites.

 

[michel]

I wonder, does the belief in the story of Noah, or disbelief, change the truth of what actually happened, or didn't happen.

I personally think not. In practical terms, actually, it can't. Whatever you believe happened in the past is not going to make any difference as to what actually happened (but I guess that's not what you mean). To me, Noah's ark, like many of those 'tales' are symbolism.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

That's not zag-man, that's Jesus.
Whites.

Okaaayyy. I've seen the White-Euro Jesus, the Black Jesus, the Hispanic Jesus etc. Now we get the "roll your own" Jesus.

 

[Booko]

That's not zag-man, that's Jesus.
Whites.

Um, it reminds me more of Paul Henry. I figured there was no room for the ox.

 

[gnostic]

There are two main reasons why God sent the Flood. The angels (fallen watchers) produced children with mortal women (ie giants or nephims), and the whole of mankind had become wicked.

If God is all-knowing and all-powerful, then why didn't he prevent the angels from their sins. It seemed he control when Sarah could have a child, so why didn't God just make the angels stertile or the women barren? He could have easily done that, instead of sending the Flood.

I just find it highly unlikely that the whole world was wicked, with the exception of Noah, his sons and their wives, who were saved.

In Genesis 8:21, God seemed to regret destroying mankind. If he could see the future, then why did he do so in the first place?

This simply doesn't make sense that he knew what his action would cause, and yet took the extreme measure anyway, and regret his action in the aftermath.

 

[Brother Jeffrey]

Okaaayyy. I've seen the White-Euro Jesus, the Black Jesus, the Hispanic Jesus etc. Now we get the "roll your own" Jesus.

Jesu was not hispanic, african, nor european, He's Israeli.

 

[Zsr1973]

the flood story is not clear in the bible because it was plagiarized from the Enuma Elish tablets of Sumer. Its not that hard to believe. Abraham was from Sumer (Shinar) and he had an entire belief system including his own torah (its in the hebrew). So the hebrews were simply displaced Sumerians and they already had stories from their native land. the Enuma Elish (original flood story) was one of them.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Jesu was not hispanic, african, nor european, He's Israeli.

Gosh, whooda thunk. All those renaissance artists were sooooooo confused.

 

[MdmSzdWhtGuy]

Gosh, whooda thunk. All those renaissance artists were sooooooo confused.

It is difficult to tell, are you trying to be tongue in cheek?

If Jesus existed and our idea of Jesus is not an amalgamation of the many god men of the 1st century, then Jesus was a person of Middle Eastern descent, not a White European of Germanic tribesman descent as is depicted in renaissance era paintings. Oh, and tho this may pain the conservative Christian crowd, Jesus was a Jew, not Anglo.

B.