Greek Mythology - Noah's Ark

[Pah]

I thought you did not read everything at face value. The Word of God teaches that Noah took 7 of every kind that was clean, male and female, totals 14. I think God expects the person who studies his word to do a little math. Also the Word of God teaches that Noah took 2 of every kind that was unclean, male and female, equals 4. Do some research on the word "kind" with the concept of evolution. Noah very possibly could have taken 7 types of "cats" from the feline kind. A panther, tiger, lion etc...14 of them, 7 males and 7 females. Same concept with the "unclean" kinds. And as for the dinosaurs, you should note that Genesis 1:1 should be its own chapter. Yes chapter. God created the heavens and the earths perfect. Yes perfect, as stated through out the Word of God that when he creates something it is perfect. Genesis 1:2 should be chapter 2. Yes chapter 2. Time and events occured between 1:1 and 1:2 which is explained throughout the Word of God, events which caused the heavens and the earths to become without form and void. I thought you said you have given great efforts in studying the bible?

There is no "kind" in evolutionary taxonomy for animals. Kingdom, Subkingdom, Phylum, Subphylum, Superclass, Class, Subclass, Infraclass, Cohort, Superorder, Order, Suborder, Superfamily, Family, Subfamily, Tribe, Genus, Species, Subspecies is the entire list. No "kind" appears there. Which of these is a "kind"?

Hehehehe QTpi will grade your answer.

-pah-

 

[Pah]

Linwood,

1. Talk Origins is an extremley biased site.

2. With God all things are possible.

Sounds like something taken from Answer in Genesis.

When you can't present the science, fall back on God.

-pah-

 

[The Voice of Reason]

We three are the only ones on the earth who believe that the Bible is true? I think that you need to try and convince the other approximately 1 billlion Christians. If you want to include all the people of the world who believe in the concept of a god, that number is considerably increased. You sir and a few others, particularly on this forum are the ones who are in the vast minority, yet believe that you are right and the rest of us are wrong. Come on, I know that you don't really believe what you have written. You have already displayed a much higher level of intelligence.

Wleeper -
1) In no way do I suggest that you are the only three believers - I merely named you because you participate in this forum. If you take comfort in large numbers, fine. Feel free to bring the other 1 billion believers in. I'll take you all on - with one hand behind my back!
2) The fact that there are more people that believe in a given thing does not make it a fact. In logic, this is known as the fallacy of an appeal to authority (in this case, your authority is the large number of believers). I would think you would reject the argument that simply because more people on earth believe in Hinduism or Islam, you should convert. I'm sure you are more wise than that.
3) You couldn't be more wrong about what I believe about what I have written. I believe very strongly in my points and questions, or I would not write them. In logic, your statement about my not believing what I wrote is known as an Ad Hominem fallacy - you do not address my premise, rather you address me.
4) I appreciate the compliment on my level of intelligence. I see you, Emu, True Blood, and others as being intelligent as well (or I would not waste my time in these debates).
I am merely asking you to defend your beliefs from a logical standpoint, as opposed to defending your position from the standpoint of revealed faith. If you cannot do so, fine.
When you post in this (or any other thread) about what the Bible says, or how it is interpreted, I pretty much just read along, and withhold comment. There are times when I feel you make your point very well. That does not mean that I agree with you, I simply like the way you defend your position in some arguments.
However, when you go outside the scope of the Bible (as has happened in this thread), I feel that we are on even ground. You have no more claim to truth than any of the other members of this site. Hence, when you make the statement that the Biblical account of the flood is true, and other accounts are not, I have the right to ask you from whence this comes.
Again, if you can defend your position, I commend you. If you cannot, then you should have the strength to retract your claim that the Biblical account is correct and all others are not.

Thanks,
TVOR

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Question: You acknowledge that many other cultures have a "world flood" story but why do you make the choice of opposing the Old Testament accounts of the event? Unless you have some hardcore facts of what happened thousands of years ago of an event that is spoken of in hundreds of cultures, what does it matter to you if someone chooses to believe in the Old Testament history? The fact that hundreds of cultures share same stories of like events should speak volumes that something, indeed is up.

True Blood -
I did not (prior to this post) acknowledge that many other cultures have a "world flood" account, but will do so now, so that we may continue the conversation. I do not oppose the Old Testament accounts any more so than I would question the accounts put forth by any other culture. The difference is, that the other cultures are not on here stating that their version is correct, and all other versions flow from theirs.
It does not matter to me which account of the "world flood" that anyone chooses to believe or disbelieve, I am merely asking you to explain to me on what basis do you make the claim that your version is correct (and the implication that others are not).

As in the post above, I would ask you, outside of the "revealed faith" that you place in God and the Bible, what proof do you have that your version is correct? If others on here wish to make the claim that the Hindu version, or the Japanese version, or the Vikings' version, etc. is correct and all others are wrong, I would put them to the same test.

TVOR

PS - It appears that you and Wleeper feel that I am attacking you for your belief system. Nothing could be further from the truth. I am only asking you to defend (logically and rationally) your position. As I said to SOGPFF in another thread:
"I do not have your capacity to believe in a revealed faith, but I do not condemn you for it". When you step outside of your chosen faith to debate a point, you may be certain that I will challenge you to defend your position (if not me, then someone will).

Thanks

 

[linwood]

I thought you did not read everything at face value.

Then you were not paying attention considering when you asked me if I did read everything at face value my answer was ..

Pretty much ..yep.
Except for poetry, prose, or parable.
But with those you must infer your own meaning, from that point they no longer maintain the consistency I need for them to influence my morality.

http://www.religiousforums.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3550&page=6&pp=10

So lets at the least attempt to keep the argument honest..ok?

The Word of God teaches that Noah took 7 of every kind that was clean, male and female, totals 14. Also the Word of God teaches that Noah took 2 of every kind that was unclean, male and female, equals 4.

I`m well aware of the math and what the text says(at face value) .
I`m intentionally disregarding the stated 7 of every kind of "clean" animal for the sake of simplicity because it doesn`t change my point in any way.
In fact the addition of even more animals makes my argument stronger.

In essence I`m cutting the flood proponents a little slack to make my life easier.

I think God expects the person who studies his word to do a little math.

You forget, I couldn`t care less what your god expects.
However if God wants to come down here and admonish me over my poor math skills he should first master 9th grade math concepts

2Ch 4:2 Also he made a molten sea of ten cubits from brim to brim, round in compass, and five cubits the height thereof; and a line of thirty cubits did compass it round about.

God can`t figure the circumference of a bowl.
The above quote would have gotten a big red slash next to it in Mrs.Atkins 9th grade math class...math was her religion.
The correct answer is 31.41 not 30
God doesn`t know that pi is 3.14

Harmonize that would ya?

Do some research on the word "kind" with the concept of evolution.

Y`know....I`ve done that, I`ve done that for a very long time.
I do that everytime I have to read another "Watchmaker" post, which is about once a week.

The truth is I`ve been to every creationist, ID, and evolution source I know of at one time or another and you know what?
None of them know what the hell a "kind" is.
I`ve come to the conclusion that the term "kind" when applied to the Bible is nothing more than a deliberate obfuscation so ID proponents will never actual have to explain what they`re talking about because they don`t really know themselves.

So if you don`t mind will you please specify exactly what a "kind" is for me if you know?
It`ll make my life much happier if you can do this.

Noah very possibly could have taken 7 types of "cats" from the feline kind. A panther, tiger, lion etc...14 of them, 7 males and 7 females. Same concept with the "unclean" kinds.

This still doesn`t help the argument for the flood.
If I`m understanding you you`re attempting to show how different variants of species might have risen after the flood.
What you`re not telling me is how did those damn Koala bears get back to Australia.
What your not telling me is how Noah fit 16,000 beasts in pairs on the Ark let alone how he fit even more considering the edict of 7 clean animals and only 2 unclean.

And as for the dinosaurs, you should note that Genesis 1:1 should be its own chapter. Yes chapter. God created the heavens and the earths perfect. Yes perfect, as stated through out the Word of God that when he creates something it is perfect. Genesis 1:2 should be chapter 2. Yes chapter 2. Time and events occured between 1:1 and 1:2 which is explained throughout the Word of God, events which caused the heavens and the earths to become without form and void.

The appeal to revealed knowledge.

Your interpretion of the explanations "throughout the word of God" is forced and thin and you know it.
Please show me verse that helps to understand the existence of the Dinos and how or why they were or were not aboard the Ark.

I thought you said you have given great efforts in studying the bible?

Again..lets try to stay on the topic and not descend into personal quips.

I`ve never made the above statement, it is merely your interpretation of my earlier posts.
We`ve already established your interpretations of other topics aren`t necessarily fact.

 

[linwood]

Appeal to popularity.
Appeal to revealed knowledge.
Appeal to authority.
Ad Hominum.
A couple of strawmen.

I`m not seeing anything to back up a Biblical flood claim.

 

[true blood]

I`m intentionally disregarding the stated 7 of every kind of "clean" animal

That's wonderful. Explains much about what kind of person you are. You probably have one of those colorful childrens story books that teachs two of every animal loaded up on the ark. But now after all your ramblings that the ark could not fit all of those animals, you state you intentionally disregarded what is actually written and that you have no clue what "kind" could mean. Brilliant.

 

[true blood]

There is no "kind" in evolutionary taxonomy for animals. Kingdom, Subkingdom, Phylum, Subphylum, Superclass, Class, Subclass, Infraclass, Cohort, Superorder, Order, Suborder, Superfamily, Family, Subfamily, Tribe, Genus, Species, Subspecies is the entire list. No "kind" appears there. Which of these is a "kind"?

Hehehehe QTpi will grade your answer.

-pah-

Well, pah, "kind" is an English word. Maybe it would be wise for one to "look into" perhaps the Hebrew or Greek word in which "kind" translated from. But then again I think both of use would agree that there has been human error in translation, so perhaps the original Hebrew word was mistranslated into the Greek and then the Greek word mistranslated into English. And you speak of classifications created by humans, perhaps God has his own classifications that differ from humans. And what good would it do for me to tell you what I think "kind" means? I'll only get bashed for it by your "kind".

 

[Pah]

Well, pah, "kind" is an English word. Maybe it would be wise for one to "look into" perhaps the Hebrew or Greek word in which "kind" translated from.

I'm surprised you don't do it. It is your argument is it not?

But then again I think both of use would agree that there has been human error in translation, so perhaps the original Hebrew word was mistranslated into the Greek and then the Greek word mistranslated into English.

Errors in the Bible??????

And you speak of classifications created by humans, perhaps God has his own classifications that differ from humans.

Then why was it not used in the Bible? It is his word is it not? I would assume God is fluent in all languages.

And what good would it do for me to tell you what I think "kind" means? I'll only get bashed for it by your "kind".

That, my friend, sounds like a cop-out.

-pah-

 

[linwood]

That's wonderful. Explains much about what kind of person you are. You probably have one of those colorful childrens story books that teachs two of every animal loaded up on the ark. But now after all your ramblings that the ark could not fit all of those animals, y

Trueblood,

You have not once in the past several repsonses provided any support whatsoever to a single statement you`ve made.

When responses have been made that provide evidence against your statements you resort to ad hominum.
At this point I would simply disregard the attacks if they were posted alongside any supporting evidence you might have but there is none so I find it hard to ignore the ad hominum.

My "ramblings" about the impossibilty of fitting 16,000 animals in the Ark are not weakened by your argument that there were actually 19,000 or more.

If it makes you happy I will concede (again)I was wrong about the amount of animals (intentionally) ,thank you for the education, now explain to me how the even greater amount of animals you proclaim could fit on the ark when the smaller (and admittedly incorrect) amount cannot even fit.

You are vehemently arguing against your own position....and winning.

Can`t you see this?

you state you intentionally disregarded what is actually written and that you have no clue what "kind" could mean. Brilliant.

Of course I have no clue what a "kind" is, NOBODY has a clue what a kind is.
The great "Creation & ID Sciences" don`t even know what a "kind" is.

This is a fact you all but admit by your obfuscation and attempt to avoid answering the question.

Trueblood....what is your definition of a "Kind"?

Just tell me what you think a "kind" is and thats the definition we`ll go with from this point on.
I won`t even raise an argument against it, I`ll just accept whatever it may be for the purposes of this discussion.
Just tell me what it is.

This is another large strawman.
You`re arguing positions that haven`t even been questioned....yet.

You cannot tell me how those animals fit on that boat.
You cannot tell me how 8 people alone dealt with the daily responsibilities of caring for over 19,000 animals AND completed the duties of running a ship.
A ship that at the very best would have been taking on hundreds of gallons of water a day due to it`s construction.
And the part that bugs me most is that you still haven`t told me how those two Koalas made it back to Australia.

You also haven`t clarified your earlier statement that the explanation of the whereabouts of the Dinos can be found throughout the scripture.

Would you just provide some support for even one of your statements?
Please?

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Of course I have no clue what a "kind" is, NOBODY has a clue what a kind is.

That's a bit harsh: 'miyn' is typically taken to mean 'species' and is no more vague or worthy of ridicule than ...

Species Term used to describe the group of like individuals. Classically species were defined as organisms that share certain characteristics.

- see ucbiotech.org

 

[linwood]

That's a bit harsh: 'miyn' is typically taken to mean 'species' and is no more vague or worthy of ridicule than ...

Perhaps I am being harsh Deut but at first I believed when folks spoke of "kind" in a Biblical sense they were refering to species as you suggest.

I was ready to accept this and move on until I became aware that a great many creationist and ID scientists state that "kind" isn`t EXACTlY the same things as a species.

Once I found out that these scientists didn`t bother to further define their use of the word "kind" I determined there was no real use for the word kind when speaking with people of similar beliefs.

I have told Trueblood that at this point I will accept any definition he wishes to use.

I think thats being kind.

If as you suggest we should use the word as content determined in the Bible I`ll happily go along.

We just need to agree between us.

 

[Faust]

In Chapter Three: How the World and Mankind Were Created in Mythology(Greek), by Edith
Hamilton, lies something I found quite interesting. I'll summarize the section for you.

Interesting, I wasn't aware of this story but I have read The epic of Gilgamesh.
It's an ancient Sumerian epic from about 3000 bce that contains many of the stories of the Old Testament. I remember reading somewhere about the Babylonians having a record of this epic in their library at the time that they held the Jews (specificaly the priestly cast) in captivity. The story of "a" flood was a part of this epic.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

If as you suggest we should use the word as content determined in the Bible I`ll happily go along.

Best I can tell from reading the creation (population) and flood (repopulation) narratives, "kind" infers entities capable of spawning reproductively viable offspring - not at all bad for late Bronze Age mythology. I'm simply suggesting that we give the Torah its due.

 

[seraphimfire]

You bring up a very controversial subject Linwood! The most important thing about the story of Noah is the dealings of God with the known world in that part of the Mideast at that junction in history. Many people surmise that this is when the asteroids hit the gulf of Mexico and other places to cause the plates to seperate very fast and while doing so the earth may have changed course and the poles may have reversed too! The books written by Velikovsky seem to bear this out.
That would spell the end of Dinosours and much of the ancient foliage! I agree with you that the "doctrine" of the Flood is impossible! The truth of the destruction of the earth is more then that! every nation on earth has a story of destruction by flood, fire,
earthquake,riseing and lowering land mass etc etc! Many species went extinct during this time. Really how come the platipuss and the Kangaroo is not found anywhere in the world except around OZ???
The world of that time and place was destroyed by Flood and the continents do show the evidence of being under water fro a time and the drainage must have been awesome! No one person however has the complete story of such a magnatude!
The story in the Bible is very accurate but people take it to extreames for the sake of "doctrines".
The agument that the men of the Bible took the legends of other cultures is Bogus and they also say that Moses Law was copied from Hammarabi but just the opposite is true.

Peace

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

The agument that the men of the Bible took the legends of other cultures is Bogus and they also say that Moses Law was copied from Hammarabi but just the opposite is true.

Your's is a statement of faith, not fact, and it is an entirely baseless one. The Code of Hammurabi dates to the 18th century BCE, i.e., centuries before the earliest evidence of YHWH or the Israelites.

 

[linwood]

That would spell the end of Dinosours and much of the ancient foliage! I agree with you that the "doctrine" of the Flood is impossible! The truth of the destruction of the earth is more then that! every nation on earth has a story of destruction by flood, fire,

I agree some massive catastrophe or numerous ones happened.
Thank you for explaining your view.

The agument that the men of the Bible took the legends of other cultures is Bogus and they also say that Moses Law was copied from Hammarabi but just the opposite is true.

I`d say it was a foregone conclusion.
The similarities are too much to be coincidental.

 

[seraphimfire]

Sorry Deut! I was in a hurry and worded that statement wrongly! You are right about the time difference but my explanation should have been aimed more at the differences between the two codes of Law! I am also of the opinion that the Flood was a great cataclysmic time for this planet with so much more happening world wide then the short story in the Bible!
Peace

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Sorry Deut! I was in a hurry and worded that statement wrongly! You are right about the time difference but my explanation should have been aimed more at the differences between the two codes of Law!

I do not understand what you're attempting to say here. Perhaps you could rephrase this such that your claim that "the agument that the men of the Bible took the legends of other cultures is Bogus" has some semblance of credibility. There is an extensive body of work (by Frank Moore Cross, Mark S. Smith, and many others) that traces the evolution of Israelite henotheism and identifies more than a few syncretic elements. I picked my username precisely because it serves as a widely acknowledged example of the latter.

I am also of the opinion that the Flood was a great cataclysmic time for this planet with so much more happening world wide then the short story in the Bible!

Which flood -- predicated on what evidence?

Everyone has a right to their opinion, but not all opinions are created equal. There is a reason why folks like Velikovsky have been relegated to the fringes of cult sciences.

 

[seraphimfire]

Well Deut,I'm a "Heritic" too your scientific gods and I'm one also on the record as one to the religious gods(doctrines) of so called christianity!
It has been fun reading and opinionating on this thread. I think I will read more and post less!
Peace