Happy Atheist Forum

Religion => Religion => Topic started by: TheJackel on January 20, 2011, 04:30:27 AM

Title: Split from Noah's Ark: The Impossible
Post by: TheJackel on January 20, 2011, 04:30:27 AM
Well, I have done a little research on this subject since I hadn't opened my bible in a while to review it critically.. However, before I get into that point, I would like to share with you the following quotes from Genesis:

Genesis 7:18-20 And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. 20 Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered.

Genesis 7:21-23 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. 23 And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.

I am curious if AnimatedDirt, Voter, or Achronos can provide me with their evidence for this (without preaching please, just scientific evidence), Quotes that support it (direct quotes from the bible), and what they think is truth vs mythical about "The Flood" quotes above. After all your evidence is posted, I will reply with as much objectivity as possible while being grounded to the scientific method. :)  

Note: This is not a continuation of the Evil vs Good debate


Ready.. GO!

[spoiler:og5hpyly]Has yet to be inserted. Please try back later![/spoiler:og5hpyly]
Title: Re: Split from Noah's Ark: The Impossible
Post by: Achronos on January 20, 2011, 05:19:56 AM
I'm more in favor of it being a prefiguration, allegorical and demythologizing story than a factual one. I do however think a flood occured (whether worldy or regional is up for debate), as accounted for in other epics (like the Gilgamesh one) and whoever authored Genesis probably took these oral traditions but made the interpretation that God was behind it and his future plans for salvation (the Church of Christ being the Ark of Salvation, and outside of it you are doomed. Interesting is that the world is being "baptized" at this moment, if we take it as historical).
Title: Re: Split from Noah's Ark: The Impossible
Post by: TheJackel on January 22, 2011, 06:17:47 AM
Quote from: "Achronos"I'm more in favor of it being a prefiguration, allegorical and demythologizing story than a factual one. I do however think a flood occured (whether worldy or regional is up for debate), as accounted for in other epics (like the Gilgamesh one) and whoever authored Genesis probably took these oral traditions but made the interpretation that God was behind it and his future plans for salvation (the Church of Christ being the Ark of Salvation, and outside of it you are doomed. Interesting is that the world is being "baptized" at this moment, if we take it as historical).

I can see that other people didn't really want to engage here. So I will just reply to your post here. There is a very big problem with your argument here Achronos, especially when the Bible is literally considered "GOD's Word", especially in Genesis. However this is largely the problem I have with your argument:

1)
Quotewhoever authored Genesis probably took these oral traditions but made the interpretation that God was behind it

This is probably the first time I've seen you start really critiquing the structure in which the bible is written. Hence the bible can best be described as ""A mere translation of a translation of an interpretation of an oral tradition" Remember, these Authors are supposed to be GOD's divine writers of truth. And yet we see what can be considered barring false witness.

2)
Quote(the Church of Christ being the Ark of Salvation, and outside of it you are doomed. Interesting is that the world is being "baptized" at this moment, if we take it as historical)

Now you are starting to realize the purpose of the bible in regards to servitude to power. It's structured this way all the way through the entire book. It's structured using the very well know fundamentals found in the mechanics of brainwashing. Hence the engineering of devotion and faith to power. It's the manipulation of the human condition,  or the emotions of the vulnerable and easily manipulated. If you read this, you might get a clearer picture of how that is constructed in the bible, in religious advertisements, and even in religious social structure. This includes the kind of social dogmas they use.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4629 (http://www.happyatheistforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4629)

However, these things aren't why I dropped the belief in a GOD.. They are why I dropped human constructed religious ideologies that use GOD as a means to manipulate the masses for whatever agendas they have. The thing is, they don't tell you that you don't need a religion to believe in some GODLY entity. What stopped my belief in GOD's had to do with my moving to materialist, and realist views. Hence GOD became a Concept of opinion and nothing more, even if an entity existed that could have sparked the Big Bang. It's no longer relevant to my position.

Anyways, I can see that you are not a Bible literalist, or an extreme Creationist. I will agree that the story could be related to a more realistic flood incident, or just based on common fables of the Flood story. I do believe there are about 500 of those. :)
QuoteFifteen cubits = 6.85800 meters
6.85800 m = 22.5 Feet

Those are some very small mountains!  I'm actually shocked I hadn't noticed it before. :) Genesis all together is pretty much equally written that ways to where Genesis can't even be considered anything more than a fable, a setup for the rest of the bible's contents. It's also where the Fear tool is first injected, and where the seeding of devotion through emotional manipulation begins. But I will save all that for another post/topic.
Title: Re: Split from Noah's Ark: The Impossible
Post by: Achronos on January 22, 2011, 07:57:20 AM
Who considers the Bible as God's Word? I don't. I also don't hold to infallibility or innerancy. Genesis is not treated as mere history, but as a source of spiritual wisdom, a book inspired by God himself. Out of all historical information available to Moses (traditionally ascribed to, but I'll just say unknown author here on out), he selected only what was related to the religious life of people. It most likely has been edited for this goal over time.

Regarding humans using the Bible as a way of brainwashing other humans, sure why not. People love power and will use it to wield it to their advantage, however that doesn't make the Bible "false". What I mean by this is that they may have a right to use it to their advantage, for whatever reason, but that doesn't mean it's the right thing to do it. I don't believe it was the author's intention hundreds of years down the road to use it to brainwash some people.

What's interesting about the Genesis creation story is there is a narrative in their that could very well allow evolution to happen. We should interprete Genesis to the science of our day just like the early Christians/Jews interpreted Genesis with the science of their day. But we must also look at Genesis in the context in the time it was written, the oral traditions that were passed down, which were recorded in Genesis, as a way of demythologizing certain ideas. I forgot what culture at the time worshipped the sun and the moon as gods, but the author of Genesis is saying "No no no, God is behind the sun and the moon"). It was written in pre-scientific and pre-historical times. Why not let science do its thing, instead of having this issue of creationism vs evolution, which is silly to me.

About the cubits, *shrugs* I don't really care about the actual meausrements for the Ark. I do think they may have derived their measurements from the Tabernacle. But really what kind of mathematical concepts did the author of Genesis have? His math could be totally off.
Title: Re: Split from Noah's Ark: The Impossible
Post by: TheJackel on January 22, 2011, 08:48:14 AM
Quote from: "Achronos"Who considers the Bible as God's Word? I don't. I also don't hold to infallibility or innerancy. Genesis is not treated as mere history, but as a source of spiritual wisdom, a book inspired by God himself. Out of all historical information available to Moses (traditionally ascribed to, but I'll just say unknown author here on out), he selected only what was related to the religious life of people. It most likely has been edited for this goal over time.

Most hardcore Christians I know "especially those In the Bible belt of America" do.. I can see you don't, but I have seen that argument before used as a deflection. But I do believe your opinion wasn't the only position I was targeting :P Man knows no such thing, and never will.

QuoteWhat's interesting about the Genesis creation story is there is a narrative in their that could very well allow evolution to happen.

Actually it can't.. Especially when it considers Earth the primacy of creation. And it does a terrible job at that. In fact, the only way that it even makes some sort of sense is if it describes the day and night cycle of an Earth day.. Hence, Night to dawn. But even then it's still critically flawed in many ways. And the various versions of Genesis pose even more problems. So it's not even worth considering.

QuoteWe should interprete Genesis to the science of our day just like the early Christians/Jews interpreted Genesis with the science of their day. But we must also look at Genesis in the context in the time it was written, the oral traditions that were passed down, which were recorded in Genesis, as a way of demythologizing certain ideas. I forgot what culture at the time worshipped the sun and the moon as gods, but the author of Genesis is saying "No no no, God is behind the sun and the moon"). It was written in pre-scientific and pre-historical times. Why not let science do its thing, instead of having this issue of creationism vs evolution, which is silly to me.

No, Genesis states that said GOD made the moon and Sun.. The only problem comes with verses that treat the GOD as the sun. It contradicts itself. Hence the GOD of light is actually supposed to be the Sun itself. It's always been a light vs Dark thing. The meaning of it really is that servitude to power is the light, and anything that should stray into the darkness is evil. It's a neat little mind trick to setup social dogma commonly found in "Christian Realism". Hence, anything against the light is to be feared, demonized, or claimed to be immoral and evil.  Anyways, here are just a few verses that deal with equating the Sun as GOD.

* (Deuteronomy 9:3 NIV) But be assured today that the LORD your God is the one who goes across ahead of you like a devouring fire. He will destroy them; he will subdue them before you. And you will drive them out and annihilate them quickly, as the LORD has promised you.

* 27And upward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were gleaming bronze, like the appearance of fire enclosed round about; and downward from what had the appearance of his loins I saw as it were the appearance of fire, and there was brightness round about him.

* Malachi intimates the appearance of the sun with the name of God. "Hosts" refers to the stars:  11For from the rising of the sun to its setting my name is great among the nations, and in every place incense is offered to my name, and a pure offering; for my name is great among the nations, says the LORD of hosts. (Malachi 1:11)

* for our God is a consuming fire. (Heb. 12:29)

* Again Jesus spoke to them, saying,I am the light of the world; he who follows me will not walk in darkness, but will have the light of life. (John 8:12)

There are many more.. But I think a few will suffice to make a point. And much of the fable behind Jesus's own story seems to follow the same theme. Hence he is considered Both GOD's son, and GOD. His death and resurrection can best be understood as the Setting sun at night and the rising sun at the break of dawn.  

QuoteAbout the cubits, *shrugs* I don't really care about the actual meausrements for the Ark. I do think they may have derived their measurements from the Tabernacle. But really what kind of mathematical concepts did the author of Genesis have? His math could be totally off.

It wasn't the measurement for the Ark..  It was the depths of the water :P.. And Cubits have always been within a foot of measurements depending on who's you use. That includes the Biblical Cubits. And if their math is that far off, it just goes to show you the education level of these Authors had. :/