The flood in Genesis

[Dirty Penguin]

The thought has crossed my mind that during the time of Noah, all the continents as we know them today were not what the dry land looked like in the times of naoh. It could very well be that the land was much smaller, therefore a world wide flood not improbable. By that I mean that the part of the continents that were above water were significantly less than it is today. Therefore the whole world, that was dry land, could have been flooded.

First of all the story is myth (See - Epic Of Gilgamesh).

The rest of your hypothesis is false. You've made a statement that the land was much different in the time of the supposed Noah. Are you able to demonstrate this with geological findings?

This who thread has shown that (itwillend) is in error. He is in error as most bible thumpers are when stating something that has been proven false scientifically.

There is no data for a worldwide flood. There is no probable or possible way for tho to happen nor has it ever happened.

The earth's geological structure over time refutes this and there were thriving civilizations before, during and after the supposed flood that have an extensive recorded history to show how false the notion of said flood was.

 

[Heneni]

First of all the story is myth (See - Epic Of Gilgamesh).

The rest of your hypothesis is false. You've made a statement that the land was much different in the time of the supposed Noah. Are you able to demonstrate this with geological findings?

This who thread has shown that (itwillend) is in error. He is in error as most bible thumpers are when stating something that has been proven false scientifically.

There is no data for a worldwide flood. There is no probable or possible way for tho to happen nor has it ever happened.

The earth's geological structure over time refutes this and there were thriving civilizations before, during and after the supposed flood that have an extensive recorded history to show how false the notion of said flood was.

To you the story might very well be a myth. Over time, facts become legends and legends become myth. Do you disagree with this premise?

 

[Willamena]

Over time, facts become legends and legends become myth. Do you disagree with this premise?

I do. While it's true that that is one context in which 'myth' exists, there is a more significant context for religion, namely in the use of metaphor to express ideas that are otherwise beyond expression.

 

[Heneni]

I do. While it's true that that is one context in which 'myth' exists, there is a more significant context for religion, namely in the use of metaphor to express ideas that are otherwise beyond expression.

What do you believe the idea behind the flood story is that is otherwise beyond expression?

 

[Willamena]

What do you believe the idea behind the flood story is that is otherwise beyond expression?

A restructuring of identity with reality.

 

[Heneni]

A restructuring of identity with reality.

But Willa, i thought it was beyond expression? Have you not expressed it then? And can God not express himself more adequetly by real events rather than by stories? Afterall when we grow up, we loose faith in stories. SO therefore the flood cannot be a story. God would not give that which faith can be lost in. If faith is lost, its because it is seen as only a story.

 

[Willamena]

But Willa, i thought it was beyond expression? Have you not expressed it then? And can God not express himself more adequetly by real events rather than by stories? Afterall when we grow up, we loose faith in stories. SO therefore the flood cannot be a story. God would not give that which faith can be lost in. If faith is lost, its because it is seen as only a story.

:yes: Indeed: I haven't expressed "it". I've expressed an idea --well done.

I cannot comment on "God" expressing things, since "he" too would be expressing "it", even in "experience", whether in stories of real events or imagined.

I haven't lost faith in stories. Some of my best friends are stories.

The flood is an interesting, imaginative, heart-felt, useful story that expresses the myth of a restructing of identity with reality.

 

[gnomon]

I noticed studying the story of the flood that Noah entered the ark at a certain date, and then exited the ark at a certain date. According to my calulations it was exactly 370 days from the time they entered to the time they exited.

What was curious about this to me, was the fact the land had become dry 2 months and 27 days prior to then exiting. Why dos the story have them hanging out another 2 months and 27 days before exiting.

Any Genesis buffs here, want to shed some light?

Thanks...

I'm not a Genesis buff. I'm not a flood mythology of Mesopotamia buff. Don't really care to be. Stopped reading the thread after the 10th page of the value of myth.

Just seemed to me no one answered the question. Maybe they did somewhere between pages 12 and 22...I don't care.

Why did Noah stay in the Ark for so long?

Here's your answer.

Where were they going to go?




I'm just attempting some mild humor.

 

[Autodidact]

From Re: WHO AUTHORED THE BIBLE? - Do You Believe? - AOL Message Boards
Did I mention rusra02 was a spammer?

And a plagiarist. He seems to have no morals at all.

 

[Autodidact]

To you the story might very well be a myth. Over time, facts become legends and legends become myth. Do you disagree with this premise?

No, I agree, but of course the facts become greatly distorted and exaggerated as they do so. I have no doubt there was a sizable flood in the Ancient Near East in biblical times. What I categorically deny is that there has ever been any flood that covered the entire world at the same time.

 

[Heneni]

:yes: Indeed: I haven't expressed "it". I've expressed an idea --well done.

I cannot comment on "God" expressing things, since "he" too would be expressing "it", even in "experience", whether in stories of real events or imagined.

I haven't lost faith in stories. Some of my best friends are stories.

The flood is an interesting, imaginative, heart-felt, useful story that expresses the myth of a restructing of identity with reality.

Then a heartfelt story it is. But your friends are real, and their lives are real, their stories are real. My God is my friend, his stories are real, to me.

Does a friend betray your convidence in their integrity by witholding truth? Would your friends tell you of things they did which they didnt, so that you could have faith in their integrity and ability and plans and purposes? Surely not. Well, hopefully not.

 

[Willamena]

Then a heartfelt story it is. But your friends are real, and their lives are real, their stories are real. My God is my friend, his stories are real, to me.

Indeed.

Does a friend betray your convidence in their integrity by witholding truth? Would your friends tell you of things they did which they didnt, so that you could have faith in their integrity and ability and plans and purposes? Surely not. Well, hopefully not.

Myth isn't about "withholding truth". That is a social perversion of myth.

 

[Heneni]

No, I agree, but of course the facts become greatly distorted and exaggerated as they do so. I have no doubt there was a sizable flood in the Ancient Near East in biblical times. What I categorically deny is that there has ever been any flood that covered the entire world at the same time.

Yes indeed, but if the only patch of land that was dry was in the East, do you think it would be impossible to flood it? The rest wouldnt have to be flooded, it would already have been under water. Just a thought.

 

[Heneni]

Indeed.


Myth isn't about "withholding truth". That is a social perversion of myth.

Willamena, you are much smarter than me. Whatever a myth is, it seems to have become something of the order of 'it did not really happen', or 'it did not really exist' And therefore the truth of the event seems to get lost. Nobody witholds the information, it just seems to have become improbable for various reasons. Loss of information, lack of eye witnesses, insufficient documentation, etc etc...

If somebody commited a murder, is trialed and set free, they are considered to not have done it. Does not change the fact that it did though, there just wasnt enough evidence to prove othewise. That might be a bad example but its the best i can come up with at this moment. And this moment is 4 am in the morning. LOL.

Heneni

 

[OmarKhayyam]

The best defense of this flood crap is what I was taught as a child.

GodDidIt. It's a miracle. We don't know HOW he did it. We don't need to know. Exactly how he did it NOT the point.
The point is - He did it. And then he said a fire not a flood next time.

THAT'S what you should learn.

See. Easy. Just believe folks, just believe. Nothing else really matters.

 

[Heneni]

The best defense of this flood crap is what I was taught as a child.

GodDidIt. It's a miracle. We don't know HOW he did it. We don't need to know. Exactly how he did it NOT the point.
The point is - He did it. And then he said a fire not a flood next time.

THAT'S what you should learn.

See. Easy. Just believe folks, just believe. Nothing else really matters.

And unless we become like children we shall never see the kingdom of god. Children believe in the impossible. God is the only one that can do the impossible.

 

[Dirty Penguin]

To you the story might very well be a myth.

Ok...ok..I think it is mythical. So far the story appears to be unfounded.

Over time, facts become legends and legends become myth. Do you disagree with this premise?

Even if I agreed here the story of the flood would still be false....unproven and unprovable.....

 

[Willamena]

Whatever a myth is, it seems to have become something of the order of 'it did not really happen', or 'it did not really exist' And therefore the truth of the event seems to get lost.

It doesn't have to be. There is another, more significant context for 'myth' to exist, that of expression of something that cannot be expressed in other than metaphor.

 

[fantome profane]

Yes indeed, but if the only patch of land that was dry was in the East, do you think it would be impossible to flood it? The rest wouldnt have to be flooded, it would already have been under water. Just a thought.

You can fantasize all you want about some strange geographic arrangement but you have to understand that there are scientists who have dedicated their lives to studying how land masses form and move. We know that what you are trying to suggest here is simply not true, whether you are talking 3000, 4000 or 6000 years ago the continents were not that different then they are today.

My advice to you is to stick close to Willamena, there is something she is trying to tell you and it is important.

Talking about whether or not the global flood actually took place is a very shallow way of thinking about this story. To think of this story as a literal historic event is to miss the meaning of the story.

 

[OmarKhayyam]

"To think of this story as a literal historic event is to miss the meaning of the story."

No, it isn't. Not from his perspective. The is NO allegory or metaphor at work here. Not for the true believer. The fact the story COULD NOT happen according to natural law IS the point.

IT did happen. GodDidIt. You are missing what he is saying. It IS impossible for anyone but God. But for him . . . just day at the office.