Your the straw man soaked in alcohol holding a burning match
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Noah's Arc and the Flood?
- Thread starter shunyadragon
- Start date
shawn001
Well-Known Member
10,000-year-old house uncovered outside Jerusalem
With range of dramatic finds in excavations ahead of highway expansion, archaeologists trace 10 millennia of human development
10,000-year-old house uncovered outside Jerusalem
No flood damage!
With range of dramatic finds in excavations ahead of highway expansion, archaeologists trace 10 millennia of human development
10,000-year-old house uncovered outside Jerusalem
No flood damage!
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"Flood or no flood? Can you just choose already, so you stop contradicting yourself?"
There is no contradiction. Show me where I am contradicting myself?
"Also, do you agree with the thread premise, or what?"
There was no "Noah Flood" as described in the bible for a FACT. As I have stated numerous times I can point to dry land going back 10,000 years everywhere on Earth. I can also show places on Earth it hasn't rained in millions of years. The floods we are talking about were not caused by rain but were Outburst floods a completely different kind of flood.
I don't think you're keeping up or actually reading the information.
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
No its rather, you are both presenting evidence for a world flood, CLAIMING it doesnt fit the Biblical timeline, CLAIMING that the Hebraic narrative stemmed from other narratives, without even presenting evidence as to why you think this /verbal narrative cultures, CLAIMING that the Biblical flood isnt the same as any real flood, yet you clearly arent even familiar with the Hebraic narrative.
Last edited:
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Again evidence there was no "Noah's Flood" as described in the Bible due to rain.
Antarctic Hills Haven't Seen Water in 14 Million Years
Antarctic Hills Haven't Seen Water in 14 Million Years
Antarctic Hills Haven't Seen Water in 14 Million Years
Antarctic Hills Haven't Seen Water in 14 Million Years
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"CLAIMING it doesn't fit the Biblical timeline"
What timeline is that according to the Bible?
First I didn't claim a Biblical timeline. I stated I can show you dry land where ist hasn't rained for the last 10,000 years and more, everywhere on the planet.
"CLAIMING that the Hebraic narrative stemmed from other narratives, without even presenting evidence as to why you think this "
Perhaps you should read the links I am posting and that may help.
"CLAIMING that the Biblical flood isnt the same as any real flood, yet you clearly arent even familiar with the Hebraic narrative."
I am very familiar with the Biblical narrative, perhaps more so than you. Did you point out two different accounts in the Biblical narrative, because I posted it from Biblical scholars? I know the story very well and it didn't happen for a fact, what part of that don't you understand.
"Biblical flood isn't the same as any real flood"
Please tell me what the difference is between a flood caused by rain according to the Bible narrative and an outburst flood?
God didn't tell Noah to build an ark because a massive lake the size of California right after the last ice age in North America broke loose causing worldwide flooding. But which did not cover all land masses in water. He supposedly told Noah he was gonna make it rain for forty days and forty nights and drown all life. But even there, we have two different accounts.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
You already said that and I replied.
Okay, tell me this was Noah suppose to take "two" or "seven"pairs" of animals on the Ark?
" When God on account of man's wickedness resolved to destroy by a flood all mankind and all the animal world, only Noah and his family and two (or seven) pairs of every living species were excepted."
FLOOD, THE - JewishEncyclopedia.com
How is this a valuable question?
shawn001
Well-Known Member
He is stating I am not familiar with the Biblical flood story. There are two narratives. If Noah at the end of the story makes a sacrifice and took two of every animal he would make a species extinct! I think it's a valuable question when you're talking about a story knowing it has inconsistencies, to begin with when discussing it. Especially as it points to the different writers over time.
"
The Sources of the Old Testament Account.—Critical View:
This story has been shown, by a careful study of the Hebrew text by scholars throughout the last century (see Cheyne, "Founders of Old Testament Criticism: Biographical, Descriptive, and Critical Studies," New York, 1893), to be a compilation by a late redactor from two (or even three) different sources, which, while agreeing in general outlines, differ considerably in details, style, and character of language. The collection or codification, in writing, of the oral traditions concerning these legends was not done by one hand nor at one period, but in the course of a very long process and by several or many hands. Many collections must have been made from time to time. Among these several have survived. Two stages are still noticeable (J1 and J2), to the earlier of which are referred the collections of the Jahvist (J) document and the Elohist (E) narrative; while the later is a thorough revision known as the "priestly writing" or "priests' code" (P), whose common theme was "the choice of Israel to be the people of Yhwh" (Wildeboer). The oldest strata of J did not know the story of the Flood: it is preserved in the later strata (J2, about 650 B.C.).
"
General Characteristics.
The story of the Flood and similar stories show that in J2 are contained separate legends and legend cycles; delicate and coarse elements exist side by side; they do not bear the stamp of a single definite period or time, and still less of a single personality. There is a decided anthropomorphic flavor in the account of J which is not found in P; and yet it is much purer and more spiritual than the cuneiform account of the Deluge.
"It is clear, then, that J2 contains the early popular legends, while P represents the later learned redaction, preserving at the same time some very old traditions. To an entirely different collection may have originally belonged viii. 7, which was inserted when the two collections J (J2) and E were later on combined by an editor, the Jahvist (Wellhausen), prior to the addition of the still later priests' code. To the final redactor (R) who united J, E, and P may be ascribed some of the brief additions and glosses.
"
Date of the Flood.
The Hebrew year originally began in the fall (see Dillmann's "Ueber das Kalenderwesen der Israeliten vor dem Babylonischen Exil," in "Monatsberichte der Berliner Akademie," Oct. 27, 1881; Muss-Arnolt, "The Names of the Assyro-Babylonian Months and Their Regents," in "Journal of Biblical Literature," xi. 72 et seq.); and since P elsewhere (Ex. xii. 2) distinctly attributes to Moses the change in the method of reckoning time, he would naturally reckon from Tishri in the period preceding the advent of the Lawgiver. The second month would be "Bûl" (I Kings vi. 38), later Marḥeshwan, beginning about the middle of October; so that the twenty-seventh of the month would correspond to the first half of November, the period when the rainy season in Palestine and the neighboring countries usually sets in. With J2 the Flood begins seven days after the announcement by God. It lasts forty days and forty nights (vi. 4, 12). The rain then ceases, and after seven days, during which the waters begin to decrease (viii. 3a), Noah sends out the first dove (vii. 6b); after another seven days, another dove (vii. 10); after a third seven days, a third dove (vii. 12),which returns no more. He then uncovers the ark, and lo! the face of the earth is dry. Then he disembarks and offers a sacrifice, which in its description recalls very vividly the Babylonian account. This account mentions seven days of preparation, six (seven?) days of storm, and seven days of waiting after the flood-storm.
" These and some minor points indicate for P a source very similar to that of J; but the considerations just given weigh against the assumption that P was directly dependent on J2 (Wellhausen, l.c., 4th ed., p. 399; Budde, l.c. pp. 467 et seq.; Holzinger, "Genesis," pp. 85 et seq.; Cheyne and Black, "Encyc. Bibl." s.v. "Deluge," § 10). Nor can it be maintained with Kosters ("Theol. Tijdschrift," xix. 335 et seq.) that P is remarkably similar to the account in Berosus, a view which would assume the later Babylonian tradition as a source (see Dillmann, "Genesis," p. 136). The tradition as found in P must have been known in Israel in early times.
Of greatest interest and importance for the study of the Old Testament account, among all these legends, is the cuneiform account of the Deluge. This was mentioned and epitomized by Berosus and Abydenus, preserved by Eusebius, "Chronicon," i. 19, edited by Schoene in "Fragmenta Historicorum Græcorum," ii. 50 et seq., iv. 281 (translated by Usener, "Flutsagen," pp. 13-15), and is fully known since George Smith's discovery, in 1872, of the cuneiform text, on editions and translations of which see Muss-Arnolt, "Assyrian and Babylonian Literature," pp. 350, 351, New York, 1902.
Pêr-napishtim, the ancestor of Gilgamesh and the favorite of the gods, relates to Gilgamesh the story of the Flood, in which he and his family and his belongings were alone saved...
"
To Mount Nisir the ship drifted and stuck fast. And when the seventh day drew nigh Pêr-napishtim sent forth a dove. The dove flew hither and thither, but as there was no resting-place for her, she returned. Then he sent forth a swallow. The swallow flew hither and thither, but as there was no resting-place for her, she also returned. Then he sent forth a raven. The raven flew away, saw the land emerging, alighted upon it, waded about, croaking, and returned no more (comp. with this the account of J2). Pêr-napishtim then disembarked, and offered to the gods a sacrifice, whose savor the gods smelled, gathering like flies around the sacrificer. The anger of Bêl, the god who was the prime mover of the Flood, and who was displeased at the salvation of Pêr-napishtim, is assuaged; he goes up into the ship, takes Pêr-napishtim and his wife, blesses them, and makes them dwell far away at the mouth of the rivers. The character and actions of Bêl and of Ea, as described here, appear united in Yhwh by J2, whose account, of course, is strictly monotheistic, purer, and loftier.
The Deluge fragment discovered by Scheil is dated in the reign of Ammizadugga, one of the last kings of the first dynasty of Babylon, and may be ascribed to about 2100 B.C. It was found at Sippar—where the Deluge is placed by Berosus—and represents the local form of the legend current in that city during this early period.
"
Source of the Hebrew Tradition.
It is maintained by many that the Hebrew tradition, especially as preserved in J2, was directly borrowed from the Babylonian at the time of the ascendency of Assyria, that is, about 700 B.C., when Judah was a vassal kingdom of Assyria (see Haupt, "Sintflut Bericht," 1881, p. 20; Usener, l.c. p. 256; Stade's "Zeitschrift," 1895, p. 160; Budde, l.c. p. 457; "Am. Jour.of Theology," Oct., 1902, pp. 706, 707). It is, however, more correct to assume with Zimmern ("Biblische und Babylonische Urgesch." p. 40) that these Babylonian legends were first made known about the Tell el-Amarna period among the original Canaanite inhabitants of Palestine, from whom they passed to the Israelites when the latter settled in the land. Others assume later Aramean or Phenician mediation (see Gunkel, "Genesis," pp. 67, 68; Winckler, "Altorientalische Forschungen," ii. 140 et seq., 160 et seq.).
In the Babylonian, and especially in the Hebrew, tradition there is the blending of two still earlier legends, the one of the destruction of mankind, wholly or in part, by the punitive judgment of the divine powers, owing to man's wickedness—a legend of a character similar to that of the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, or the story of Philemon and Baucis in classic lore; the other, that of a flood as such, either local or universal. The Flood was not in the tradition's view universal, as "universal" would be understood at present, simply because the world of the early writers was a totally different world from that of to-day. This latter legend again undoubtedly goes back ultimately to a nature-myth representing the phenomena of winter, which in Babylonia especially is a time of rain. The hero rescued in the ship must originally have been the sun-god. Thus the Deluge and the deliverance of Pêr-napishtim are ultimately but a variant of the Babylonian Creation-myth (Zimmern; see also Cheyne, s.v. "Deluge," § 18).
FLOOD, THE - JewishEncyclopedia.com
You do know that this stuff has been addressed on these forums ad nauseam, right?
If one is arguing against inerrancy, the existence of inconsistencies is relevant. Here it appears to serve primarily as an opportunity to dump carefully selected and exhaustive (and, most likely, recently discovered) quotes.
No one has presented any evidence for a world flood, and that is main point of the thread. The question: What is the evidence and relationship of catastrophic floods to early human records of catastrophic floods?
The references give abundant evidence that the catastrophic flooding ONLY occurred in larger river valleys, and the uplands, hills and mountains show absolutely no evidence of floods. The presence of ancient structures (10.000 year old house) further support that the catastrophic floods occurred ONLY in large river valleys. The best examples are the Tigress Euphrates Valley and the Yellow River Valley. which are well documented as having a natural cause.
There is a possibility that the inundation of the Persian Gulf by glacial melt water (Lake Agassiz–Ojibway (LAO) is the catastrophic event that lead to the flood recorded in Babylonian writings and later in the Bible, but I question the suddenness of some claims that the event was catastrophic.
shawn001's post #109 is an excellent post describing the known literary history of the Biblical flood account.
Last edited:
Kilgore Trout
Misanthropic Humanist
You can't reason with an adult who takes stories such as Noah's ark as literal fact. You'd have to start over with them from scratch to build a normally-functioning, reasonably rational mind.
metis
aged ecumenical anthropologist
What are you calling "soft fossils"? Fossils are largely hardened minerals that has taken the place of tissue, and the only thing that may be "soft" is if there's any tissue trapped within it. Even d.n.a., by itself, is not "soft".
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Soft, as in not rock or hard consistency IN COMPARISON to some other fossils.
Literal description of the fossil.
Are you going to address the thread premise?
Last edited:
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
This is nothing new. Just another argument from assumption. I don't buy such arguments. Got any hard, concrete facts to back up your assumptions?
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Localized, larger, what exactly are you saying?
Wrong lol. Obvious to someone who is actually familiar with the Hebraic narrative. Since you arent familiar with it either, you're just adding to the mess.
Last edited:
Desert Snake
Veteran Member
Which planet are you talking about?
Anyways, if that is your argument, then it refutes the larger flood to myth idea. Just throwing paint at a wall and calling it an argument doesn't work.
trees
wow thank you that was cool!! You totally have zero clue about nature other than mechanical and you projected that right into my writing completely lacking self awareness of that exactly like church does!!!! It was like wow total transliteration into reductionism facinating to say the least. Paredolia it is also called, my writing must be getting better!! Thank you for that!!!
gnostic
The Lost One
Fossils are not soft.
As metis have pointed out, fossils are the minerals within bones and teeth that have turn into rock.
You are talking to our resident anthropologist, syncretic.
Metis is retired, but he has extensive experiences in the fields of archaeology and palaentology, so he would know better than you and I, about fossils and remains.
Have you studied palaentology or archaeology, syncretic?
I haven't. I did study geology, but that was only for my civil engineering course, so fossils and fossil process were not part of my course's syllabus.