Posted on 06/23/2008 3:05:46 PM PDT by betty boop
Beware the oysters, indeed!!!!
LOL, you know what a hot button "second realities" are for me, dearest sister in Christ! How could I resist?
Thank you for raising the issue!
A flood would not have to be global in the sense of global unundation.. All it would have to do is effect all the food chains negativly to blot out most life.. Which is "the spirit" of the biblical verses(creationists hold to).. the intent.. the end result..
Looking for flood lines in strata at every level would be quite silly.. overlooking the intent of the scripture and missing "the point".... only to make a reverse point.. in error..
So we have a flood that was not a flood, which destroyed civilizations but not populations, and took place over about a century or more instead of a year. How does this even vaguely resemble the biblical account?
A flood would not have to be global in the sense of global unundation.. All it would have to do is effect all the food chains negativly to blot out most life.. Which is "the spirit" of the biblical verses(creationists hold to).. the intent.. the end result..
You know the Bible better than I. So you (collectively) are backing off the claim of a global flood?
Where, then, did this formerly-global flood occur? And what evidence is there to support that claim.
Looking for flood lines in strata at every level would be quite silly.. overlooking the intent of the scripture and missing "the point".... only to make a reverse point.. in error..
Really?
Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. The water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered.All flesh that moved on the earth perished, birds and cattle and beasts and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died.
Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark.
Genesis 7:17-23
Looks pretty explicit to me. All the earth was covered, everything died, the only things left alive were the creatures on the Ark.
There is a human tendency to attribute to God’s action/fault natural disasters which God uses to further His designs. Just because a natural disaster is at the heart of the world-wide flood(s), does not mean God caused the natural disaster. And what occurred world-wide may have been focused upon as it effected the Middle East specifically, thus such flooding world-wide over a period of time would not necessarily have to be the focus of the specific cultures the Bible describes as 'wiped out'. To the writer of the Bible, the scribe not the author dictating, the focus would be 'the whole world' if the scribe had no knowledge of the rest of the globe.
One needs to choose paths carefully, where one states God uses catastrophe and other path which asserts that God causes catastrophes. Anti-religion agenda driven posters will twist our words to read 'God causes the catastrohes' when our post actually only assert that God uses these natural disasters because He knows they are coming. These same posters will accuse that God sends people to Hell, when in reality He has made a way to avoid Hell and it is the rejection of His gift that sends someone away form His presence.
I appreciate your point.
However, there’s ample Biblical example of God actually deliberately causing great disasters . . . Moses and Pharoah . . . for example.
And, at some point . . . it’s a bit moot if God allows reaping what’s been sown . . . the effect is essentially the same as if God arranged it independently on His own, imho.
Thx.
Gen. 6:17 "Behold, I, even I am bringing the flood of water upon the earth, to destroy all flesh in which is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is on the earth shall perish."
Gen. 7:23 "Thus He blotted out every living thing that was upon the face of the land, from man to animals to creeping things and to birds of the sky, and they were blotted out from the earth; and only Noah was left, together with those that were with him in the ark."
I don't think God is interested in your PR campaign. He seems to want everyone to know that he planned and carried out the destruction of the world.
Sorry my FRiend, I cannot agree with your characterization for it paints God as petulent, ultimately. I would call your attention to the incident when Joshua crossed the Jordan ‘dried up’; there is evidence that the Jordan dries up periodically due to landslides up river which dam up the flow for a time before breaking through again to follow the riverbed. I personally believe God notified Joshua where to camp across from Jericho because God was aware that the landslide was imminent and the flow would be interrupted.
Touche! And where does the scripture indicate to you that the wiping out did not occur over a period of perhaps decades, with a concentrated flooding of the Middle East via the waters breaking through from the Atlantic Ocean to inundate the entire area (and evidenced with submerged ruins along the Black Sea, for instance)?
I never claimed a global flood, some do, I do not.. The word "flood" can have incarnations.. and have variations of intensity in various locations.. You know.. as ALL floods do.. During "floods" some places are high and dry.. ALWAYS.. even lately in New Orleans.. "Flood" is a nebulous word..
But here I must digress because you must realize that when you argue against your definition of a "global flood," you are arguing against a theological view I have not asserted and is not shared among all Christians and Jews.
Some Christians do indeed read Genesis to mean that the flood literally covered all mountains (including Everest) around the world and destroyed all forms of animal life.
But my leaning in the Spirit is different. The Scriptures are Spiritual. Truly, the words of God are spirit and life not mere text or symbols on media, like math or science journals.
And what I "see" is that the Noah Flood was indeed global - worldwide - but that it was targeted or purposed specifically to destroy every creature in which was the neshama the breath of life.
And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein [is] the breath of life, from under heaven; [and] every thing that [is] in the earth shall die. - Genesis 6:17
All in whose nostrils [was] the breath of life, of all that [was] in the dry [land], died. - Genesis 7:22
To God be the glory!
So true!
For the Scripture says to Pharaoh, "FOR THIS VERY PURPOSE I RAISED YOU UP, TO DEMONSTRATE MY POWER IN YOU, AND THAT MY NAME MIGHT BE PROCLAIMED THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE EARTH." So then He has mercy on whom He desires, and He hardens whom He desires.You will say to me then, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?"
On the contrary, who are you, O man, who answers back to God? The thing molded will not say to the molder, "Why did you make me like this," will it?
Or does not the potter have a right over the clay, to make from the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for common use?
What if God, although willing to demonstrate His wrath and to make His power known, endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction?
And He did so to make known the riches of His glory upon vessels of mercy, which He prepared beforehand for glory, even us, whom He also called, not from among Jews only, but also from among Gentiles.
Romans 9:17:23
You'll note Paul never answers the question, "Why does He still find fault? For who resists His will?" He just says, "Suck it up, God gets to do what he wants." God apparently picks some people and hardens them towards him, resulting in their doing evil acts, and then shows the chosen few how lucky they are by destroying the wicked, who never really had a choice ("who resists His will?")! Of course, he could just have made everyone be good in the first place, but then he couldn't demonstrate his "patience" before napalming his chosen bad people into ashes.
Damned people: Sucks to be you!
The results from a flood can kill living things far beyond the actually flooded areas.. Food chain disruption can exterminate.. We'll all see that when the muzzies start nuking American cities.. When "Mad MAx" mentality become entreanched.. Hopefully not SOON..
Come on, I know you must have a Bible. Genesis 7 sets up the timeline very specifically.
2nd month, 17th day: Flood begins.
40 days, 40 nights rain.
150 days duration the earth is covered completely.
150 days duration the waters receded.
7th month, 17th day: landfall on the mountains of Ararat.
10th month, 1st day: mountaintops all visible.
40 days: release of various birds, 2nd dove returns with an olive leaf, 3rd dove does not return.
1st month, 1st day: The water is dried up from the earth. The catastrophe is officially over, God swears not to wipe out the population again by flood.
But that is not what the Bible says. The Bible says the earth was covered and everything drowned.
Thanks for proving the point that you are a little ‘nettle irritant’ with an agenda and zero manners.
Not in Noah's Flood, as the Bible clearly states.
"Flood" is a nebulous word..
I understand the meaning of the word "is" can be debatable as well.
I know, many people find that particular passage extremely irritating. Take it up with Paul—I didn’t write it!
Everything is the operative phrase..
Christianity isn’t the only religion that claims the flood happened. I believe some ancient religions also did (Babylonians maybe?). It bears looking into.
When you live on the banks of a large river, like many early civilizations, floods are extremely relevant.
Like Jewish Physicist Gerald Schroeder, I also see that both the Creation Week of Genesis 1 and the physical record of a some 15 billion year old universe are true and consistent when one considers relativity and inflationary theory: Age of the Universe
On the Noah Flood, clearly I see that it was a flood though there may have been aspects (or provocations) other than water - including earthquakes, volcanoes, comets, fires, etc. And clearly I see that it was worldwide as the evidence shows.
The difference in my view and some is that I see it as targeted or purposed to destroy everything in which was the neshama - God's breath of life. More specifically, that would mean Adamic man and the beings described in Genesis 6 - and every thing they touched.
Well, it failed in its purpose, then, since the population was not reduced to 8 people.
True.. so is republican debateable..
The Bible offers an expansive list of what got killed, basically amounting to everything. I can expound if you like.
Truly, God's will includes not only His active will but His permissive will as well.
Almost every culture on Earth includes an ancient flood story. Details vary, but the basic plot is the same: Deluge kills all but a lucky few.
* Older than Genesis is the Babylonian epic of Gilgamesh, a king who embarked on a journey to find the secret of immortality… [Gilgamesh lived about 2700 BC but the story was written about 2000 BC]
* Ancient Greeks and Romans grew up with the story of Deucalion and Pyhrra, who saved their children and a collection of animals by boarding a vessel shaped like a giant box.
* Irish legends talk about Queen Cesair and her court, who sailed for seven years to avoid drowning when the oceans overwhelmed Ireland.
* European explorers in the Americas were startled by Indian legends that sounded similar to the story of Noah. Some Spanish priests feared the devil had planted such stories in the Indians’ minds to confuse them.
That happens today. Look at all the flooding that occurs. I’m not all too sure the entire world was flooded, perhaps only the ancient world they knew, but there was something that happened.
Or maybe we could just mention Plato a bit here? Certainly that wouldn't be "theological!"
I'm not sure how to reconcile the biblical dating here with what geologists have to say about the period in question; i.e., ~2,200 B.C.
Yet the fascinating thing is it is precisely within this geological period that Plato places his myth of Atlantis (~2,200 B.C.), in the "unfinished" dialogue, Critias. [Warning: the Greeks generally do not get high marks for their handling of time problems....]
As far as I know, Plato's reference to Atlantis is the only recorded instance in history suggesting that such a place actually existed. Plato describes Atlantis as the wealthiest, most prosperous, most technologically advanced, and most strictly socially integrated society of its day. An Athens that was well in Plato's past at the time of his writing this dialogue went to war with Atlantis; and ultimately, under the most difficult circumstances, ultimately prevailed.
But by then, it simply didn't matter: For what instantly occurred was a great natural cataclysm that set up earthquakes and floods of extraordinary violence, such that "in a single dreadful day and night all [the Athenian] fighting men were swallowed up by the earth [earthquake], and the island of Atlantis was similarly swallowed up by the sea and vanished [great flood]."
My own view is that Plato's tale of Atlantis is pure fiction, a literary device that he used to explore certain aspects of his political and social thought that need not detain us here. What I suspect, however, is that Plato may well have been aware of geological events that occurred nearly 2,000 years before his own time, which would have been within the ken of the greatest scientists of the day, the Egyptians. Indeed, Plato himself has Critias document the tale of Atlantis as information that came to him ultimately from Solon, who heard it from the Egyptian priests; which information Solon transmitted to Critias's grandfather, from whom Critias heard the tale.
The Myth of Atlantis gives us yet another "tale" or account of a Great Flood occurring within the geological period of interest here.
Plato never really tells us where his Atlantis "is." There is some suggestion that she lay outside the Pillars of Hercules; i.e., in the Atlantic Ocean. There would be good literary reasons for putting Atlantis "outside" the Mediterranean basin altogether, to emphasize the more universal implications of Plato's account.
But scholars seeking possible empirical connections between the myth and the geological record tend to associate Atlantis with ancient Crete. Crete, evidently, was devastated, overwhelmed by a great natural disaster which occurred around, or fairly closely following, the above-indicated timeframe — the devastating volcanic eruption of Thera (a volcanic explosion that was like the Krakatoa explosion of the modern period, on steroids).
Thera was an island in the Mediterranean Sea; when she blew, she disappeared forever. Some geologists and cultural historians credit the volcanic explosion on Thera as responsible for the widespread destruction which took place on Crete, after which this great island culture never recovered its former glory and prosperity....
The point of the Atlantis myth, it seems to me, is its reference to the extraordinary geological disturbances occurring in this time period, involving extremely violent, widespread volcanic activity; pervasive, recurring earthquakes; and especially gargantuan floods.
What could have set off such events? Why not comets and the disaster they evidently unleashed, in the Bronze Age?
Which is my central point, whether law writings or prophesy - the Scriptures beginning in Genesis 2 - focus on the life (or not) of Adamic men.
Non-Adamic men are brought into the story, the promise, later through Jesus Christ (the Song of Moses is sung along with the Song of the Lamb in Revelation 15, sheepfolds, etc.)
Thank you so much for sharing this information, dearest sister in Christ!
Indeed, the sheer universality of this cultural memory is the most striking, really amazing thing!
It's this sort of thing that makes it impossible for me to simply "diss" or dismiss our cultural forebears as ignorant, superstitious rubes. You simply cannot say that "all the people" (i.e., universal humanity and its experience) are wrong all the time.
Thanks so much for writing, dearest sister in Christ — and for your encouragements!
“Thanks for proving the point that you are a little ‘nettle irritant’ with an agenda and zero manners”
All this guy does is insult people
Your operative word there, as I perceive it, is "merely". Also, since I have experience in both automated process control and in software development, I view the "human control loop" as being most akin to the software construct of an "event loop". In an event loop, the program cycles at maximum speed through a loop where it is waiting for an "interrupt" or "event" signal. A good example of an "event" is a mouse click, which then puts the program into a series of "CASE" statements that identify where the mouse coordinates were when the click occurred. For example: "mouse click in scroll bar" or "mouse click on button #..."
That sort of control loop is not deterministic, but reactionary. It is the epitome of free-will decision-making. (We can decide not to react to that car approaching us at high speed on a cross street - although we usually choose avoidance action, instead...)
I tend to see us as having such an "event loop" "running" continuously, but I also appreciate that we can be predictive of the future: ("Will that car pass through the intersection before I get there?")
Ask anyone who has designed control systems IF he can design one to handle all the events and decisions we are capable of making -- just on a drive to the grocery store. He will probably acknowledge that the human eye-brain-body -- as designed by our Creator -- is far more capable and flexible than any system he could design...
I just watched a video of a man holding a shotgun in his right hand and eight clay pigeon targets in his left. He then proceeded to toss the targets into the air -- and then break them all with eight individual shots (no "doubles") before they reached the ground! We are, indeed, "fearfully and wonderfully made"!!!
This deluge had it really happened would have left behind unmistakable evidence of its occurrence. While geological records show that there had been epochs when some of the earth’s surface now covered by land was covered by water and vice versa. This flooding and drying happened repeatedly in many places at different times. However there is no evidence whatsoever of a worldwide flood as recorded in the book of Genesis. [1]
In fact some of the evidence against the actual occurrence of a worldwide flood was already known more than a hundred years ago. The man who bought forward one such evidence was the one considered to be the father of modern geology, Charles Lyell (1797-1897). In his 1863 book, The Geological Evidences for the Antiquity of Man, he noted that the extinct volcanoes of France in the Auvergne district were composed of loose ashes. The volcanoes had been extinct for a long time, certainly longer than the purported time of the biblical flood. Thus he continued:
“Had the waters once risen, even for a day, so high as to reach the level of the base of one of these cones-had there been a single flood fifty or sixty feet in height since the last eruption occurred- a great part of the volcanoes must have inevitably been swept away”[2]
Today the geological (and historical) evidence for the non-occurrence of a worldwide flood is simply overwhelming. Ian Plimer, Professor of Geology at the University of Melbourne, gave a thorough listing of these in his book Telling Lies for God: Reason versus Creationism. We will give two of the evidence cited by Professor Plimer: [3]
The first concerns the sequence of the sedimentary deposits. There are two kinds of sediments: high energy and low energy sediment. Based on simple laboratory tests and field observations of actual floods, it can be shown that high energy sediments, such as gravel, are deposited during the height of floods. Low energy sediments, such as siltstone, mudstone and claystone, are deposited during the waning of the floods. Thus if there is a worldwide flood we would expect that there would be a uniform worldwide sedimentary formation with the high energy sediments (ancient gravel, sands) at the bottom and the low energy sediments at the top. Yet this is not seen on anything close to a global scale. As Professor Plimer pointed out, if this is to be seen on a global scale, oilfield geologists would have an easy job since all sedimentary formation would invariably have sandstone at the bottom and siltstones, mudstones and claystones at the top!
The second concerns the evidence of the environment of the sediments during its time of deposition. Chemical and fossil evidence shows that some sedimentary rocks were formed in freshwater environments while others were formed in a saline (salty-seawater) environment.
At that age you are dealing with soils, not rock; archaeology and sedimentology, not geology.
And the evidence should be widespread (worldwide, in fact). It is not there.
If it was there I would run into it almost daily doing archaeology. I don't. It is simply not there.
What would be gained?..
Interesting things could happened with any number of possiblies even meteors large and small and/or tsunamis.. and vulcanism.. there were no newspapers internet or mostly even books to document it.. The printing press changed documented history completely..
No.
I don’t see God as being petulant at all.
Nor do I see landslides as causing the Jordan to dry up.
Nor do I think Pharoah drowned in a few inches of water in the “Reed” Sea.
Besides, that period’s chariots have been found at both sides of the Red Sea in the most likely spot for the miraculous crossing.
INDEED.
None of the judged escaped judgment . . . e.g. the fallen angels given to copulating with human women and the humans of similar values etc.
I believe that we will discover that assertion to be wrong.
IIRC, I even read some genetics DNA studies indicating something like that had to have happened.
Ah, ha; a grudging admission that city populations are no longer wiped out to the last man, woman, and child by Christian armies, even though such practices are “not a full century removed from this kind of behavior.” I guess any period of time less than a century doesn’t count. Is that the idea?
The original motive in declaring an open city was to spare its inhabitants. The Twentieth Century could be called the century of open cities, because so many were declared open to spare them a vicious bombing for no better purpose than to spread terror. Sometimes the declaration was honored, sometimes not. But I know of no instance in the Twentieth Century when a city’s denizens were wiped out, man, woman, and child by a Christian army because they (the citizens) had offered more than mere token resistance, or for any other reason. Not Warsaw, not Guernica, not even Bremen or Hamburg. I guess you need to move that bar back another century.
”I would argue that nominally Christian nations have become less savage as they have become more secular.”
I can think of no more secular a nation that was formerly “nominally Christian” than the old Soviet Empire, and I must say that it had a seventy-two year history of blood and horror that would be difficult to match in the annals of . . . well . . . blood and horror. And it is beginning to appear that its present day successor is bent on continuing in the same tradition, although it has quite some ways to go to rival its predecessor in savagery. It would appear that East Berlin and the Rumania of Ceauşescu did also aspire to emulate their patron state, the Soviet Union, albeit on a smaller stage, before turning to a more tolerant policy towards Christians following the Soviet collapse. And it would appear that Poland, the most Christian of the Eastern European countries continues to also be the most admirable. And, finally, it would appear that it is Belarus and The Ukraine that remain the more secular and the most oppressive, following the example of Russia.
But, there is some peril in turning to the comfort of secularity. As I’ve observed before, there is a tendency to forget the last moment and to ignore the next moment when framing an argument for the present moment.
”Our own nation provides numerous examples. I mentioned slavery, but there is also the forced relocation of the Cherokees, to cite just two examples.”
I take it, then, that you reject the thesis that America is purely a secular nation and that it enjoys no Christian influence, past or present, in its policies and attitudes. That’s the problem. How are you going to work both sides of this street? That Christianity has had no influence on America, but that it is to blame for every bad thing that we Americans have ever done. But, I have confidence that you can get the job done; that you can turn yourself inside out, denying that Christians have had any influence on America out of one side of your mouth, and blaming Christians for every bad thing that America has ever done out of the other side of your mouth.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.