Christians of Veeky Forums, how do you interpret the story of the flood in the Bible...

heretic

not gilgamesh. gilgamesh met Utnapishtim who survived the flood thanks to Ea

Church fathers as early as Saint Cyprian (in De Ecclesiae Catholicae Unitate) speak of Noah's ark mainly in symbolic and typological rather than historical terms.

t. Catholic

the general belief is that all the animals invited on the ship were not necessarily 2 of each animal as much as 2 interbreeding animals (1 grey wolf, one coyote) as opposed to 2 grey wolves, 2 coyotes, 2 red wolves, 2 mexican wolves, 2 labradors. and then with those two genetically different yet interbreedable species the other species thus evolved.

So really the argument shouldnt be "how did they fit so many animals on" as much as maybe "how did they get such a large genetic variation so fast"

Also the bible includes that there was more than 2 of every clean (probably meaning domesticated) animal

>learned too much about the bible to believe most of it
>tried to believe what little remained but failed
>even if I had like this guy I would've been a heretic

I would be completely content with this explanation if Noah's lineage didn't play a huge role in the rest of the Bible. This story throws doubt on everything from Joseph to David.

>Also the bible includes that there was more than 2 of every clean (probably meaning domesticated) animal
have you not read Leviticus?

Noah is Christ, the Ark is the Church.

and the general biblical argument for this (since your questioning scripture, scripture has the burden of proof so im using it, if i cant use scripture I cant defend the burden of proof yknow) is that since the bible said 2 of each kind instead of 2 of each animal, it makes it pretty clear that they were talking about SIMILAR animals but not necessarily the same species. and before you say "well how did they make sure to get the specific species which dna was so recursive" lets remember that its not like any of this is supposed to be a random process

you never really tried to believe, you just got offended by a God that knows you better than you do and you have to much pride to handle that you cant really effect anything. in order to be a christian you have to understand that you arent infalliable and that no man is. If you grew up in anything other than biblicism than that explains your inability to reconcile the God of your sermons with the God of the Bible.

Literally, but I take most literary discrepancies in stride. It doesn't bother me.

dude, have you ever read Gilgamesh?

why did Christ get metaphorically drunk and metaphorically expose himself to his sons?

This flies in the face of evolution. Why would God intentionally mislead us?

wtf no he isnt. what the fuck, that doesnt make any sense at all. holy crap thats paganistic

The Bible is not a historical document.

In Christian (or at least Catholic) typology the ark represents communion and unity, the message being that there is one path to salvation ordained by God but which has to be built by humans in this world and that everything outside this structure is doomed.

I would recommend De Ecclesiae Catholicae Unitate (which I already mentioned) as a good primer on that perspective.

If you're taking the entire Bible literally you're in for a huge headache. Practically everything that occurs in the Bible before the exile to Babylon is disputed. The Judeans only really began properly recording their stories at that point onwards. A confederation of desert tribes aren't going to have a perfect recollection of what their ancestors went through. Mythologising is invevitable. Focus on examining the claims of the New Testament, rather then creation stories.

OP (but not the guy you replied to) here. I'm legitimately trying to work this out. I realize I'm a piece of shit and fall short in every way imaginable. I need God. I'm just all broken up about this story and how to make sense of it.

"flies in the face of evolution."
what do you mean?
I dont understand how I explained a situation where God is misleading us but if you would show me exactly what you mean maybe I can try to explain. I just sincerely dont understand what you are trying to say

i think it describes a real event using mythical language. what i mean is that i believe there really was a cataclysmic global flood and that god preserved life from being completely extinguished. now whether noah was the only person who god saved and the specifics of the ark and animals i dont really know. its certainly possible through gods miraculous power that it literally happened the way its written but i also think its possible that moses condensed and stylized the actual history into a story that people could easily understand

yet it tries to be a historical document just as much as the sumerian kings list does. there is a continuous genealogy from Adam through Noah through Abraham through Jacob et al through the 400 years in Egypt through David through Josiah through Christ. please tell me at which point this genealogy stops being metaphorical and becomes historical

well did you read what I wrote here:
and here
You shall take with you seven each of every clean animal, a male and his female; two each of animals that are unclean, a male and his female; also seven each of birds of the air, male and female, to keep the species alive on the face of all the earth” (Genesis 7:2-3)

There's not nearly enough time for the amount of genetic diversity to come about since the flood. It also creates the question of how the animals spread to each corner of the world. A bear would die immediately in the middle east.

obviously youve never heard of the American kennel club because there definitely has been enough time.

You won't find any evidence outside of the Bible that indicates the stories in Genesis and Exodus actually happened. God gave you a brain. You're not being sinful for using critical thinking. And just because these early stories didn't literally happen, doesn't mean God isn't real

no, they did literally happen and there is evidence all over, many cultures have a story of the deluge and the evidence is what current arceologists refer to as "the little Ice age"

He took in my line of work with a widening of the eyes and a nodding of the head. It was time to go. I had my hand up, trying to catch my waiter’s eye to get the bill.
Then the elderly man said, “I have a story that will make you believe in God.”

Yes and I'm very grateful that you've taken the time to respond. I'm just still incredibly confused because this doesn't seem to work with our scientific understanding of species and genetic diversity.
But these were concerted human efforts to create diversity.

not quite, before 8th century it starts to get more disputed and foggy. it's more plausible that most of the bible up to before kings was written in some form before the exile in 7th to 6th century B.C. Judah by scribes. even with this of course the oral history that went into stretches back further. For example, Gath was sacked by Hazael in the 9th century BC and never recovered, but before that it was a fairly important fortified city in the region. that Gath has an important position in Samuel, both with Goliath and with David as a vassal of Gath along with other place names that don't fit into a later time period shows that parts of Samuel at the very least do reach back to at least the 9th century.

They probobly drifted about for a very long time to create such an Elaborate story.

If THIS alone is enough to bring up doubts for you then yes you should drop religion because you're too dense, even amongst religious morons.

what does that bible verse have to do with anything? why do you assume that it means domesticated animal with "clean" is never used in hebrew to refer to domesticated animals. "clean" refers to animals deemed clean according to the dietary codes in Leviticus

So when do you think the Bible begins to be a historical document? When are the allegories and stories over? Genuine question.

Maybe there was an actual flood that occured in pre-recorded history around the Mediterranean. That's plausable. But there was no Earth-covering flood where a man built a giant boat and shoved 2 of every animal onboard. But flood geology isn't considered a scientific. We're mostly basing this off ancient myths in the Eastern Mediterranean

It's bigger on the inside?

or maybe the deluge just happened a lot longer ago than a new earth idiot would believe. you have to remember that biblicist christianity and new earth creationism are not two of the same things.

yes it is a concerted effor to create divirsity but that was just one example let me show an example of how fast things can evolve

the diagram to the left is an image of african cichlid fish, every fish in that image is a cichlid and most of them are VERY recent evolutions, Evolution happens very fast, it is a gradual thing, but it also isnt. The American Kenel club, the African cichlid, The birds darwin observed on the galapagos, the recent and rapid domestication of foxes, the frequent independent existance of coydogs, butterflies in mexico. these are all examples of just how rapidly evolution can occur and just how drastic it can be. the amount of time since the deluge has without a doubt been consistent with how fast we can observe animals evolve

yet domesticated dogs are actually too closely related to be comparable to a wolf and a fox. I don't know of any case of two types of domesticated dogs being unable to produce fertile offspring than say the pure mechanical problems of pairing a great dane with a chiwawa. also pure breeds are notoriously inbred

There's archaeological evidence of global floods. Were they the biblical floods or those reported in almost every other major religion? Possibly. Does it prove that some of the stories from the bibles and religious texts might be based off true accounts? Sure. Is there any concrete evidence backing either the bibles authenticity or opposite? Nope.

see
here's the finches

I recall reading that Dingos are the progenitors for all canine species globally, or atleast they all descended from dingoes, which would mean noahs tale is bs because dingoes are found only on one contintent.

Perhaps you're right. I'll look into this. My current stance is theistic evolution but I'm open to anything that makes sense. Thank you for taking the time to discuss this with me.

I'm going to now dump proof of rapid evolution because thats the only way I can possibly prove my point since my kennel culb answer apparently wasnt good enough and most people cant connect it to other instances

>it's just a metaphor bro!

not a clear division, but I'd say 75% of Kings is fairly accurate, non-mythical history. I'm a believer in Israel Finkelstein's theory that there was no united kingdom of Israel under David and Solomon, although there may have been a historical David whose story began as an oral tradition of the Davidic dynasty of Judah and was put into writing initially in the 8th century and went through many changes and additions from the 7th to 6th century. Kings strikes me as a piece of religious propaganda written during the exile, although it cites documents that were older. Kings has been verified to be correct on several accounts, although biased of course, from the tel Dan and meshe stele and assyrian documents verifying the names of various Kings of Israel.

How do you believe all this if what is in the bible was literally chosen by committee and is what Christianity itself is based upon, not the actual teachings of christ? How stupid are you?

One of the most widely misunderstood aspects of Genesis is the notion that Adam is a universal ancestor to humanity, and all the necessary "historical" consequences of that assumption. Genesis itself certainly never claims that, merely that Adam was created directly by god (or the gods) and placed in the Garden, and is clearly special. It even implies against it, with the split creation story of Gen 1:2, as well as Cain's reaction after Abel's murder, namely to go build a city, which is pretty weird if there's somewhere between 3-5 people on the planet.

It's pretty clear that the OT is talking about an ultimate ancestry to the Jews, and that's what Adam is, the oldest male ancestor they've got. Once you start with that, the flood changes from a worldwide catastrophe that wipes out all of humanity except for one family to a local catastrophe centered around Adam and his descendants, of which there are probably hundreds to maybe low thousands by this point. This of course is obvious if you read it in the original Hebrew, where the Flood is invariably mentioned covering the "land", with the same word used to describe places like the "land" of Egypt or the "land" of milk and honey that the Canaanites need to be kicked out of.

Thanks. Do you have any further reading that I can check out?

Well I'm very happy to get to discuss this!
And Theistic evolution isn't inherently incompatible with the bible. I would argue that Thiestic evolution is something that MUST be accepted if one wishes to be a biblicist and not believe the world is 6000 years old.

If you really want to seek truth I'd suggest reading the bible. Its like anything else. If you atch the news now days youre going to see a biased opinion. youre going to see things explained in a way beyond fact. However if you come to websites like this, you're going to find many more primary sources and many more immediate explanations. Likewise, going to a church and listening to the pastor can be equally detrimental. being a christian is about having a personal relationship with God, it's aobut trying to understand what he says, its not about having a relationship with your pastor, although that can be a helful tool.

Dont be dissuaded, the path to being a Christian isn't easy, It's one of ridicule, regret, frustration, relapse, addiction, and reliance. The rewards found in chrisitanity will not manifest here, the only rewards you will find on earth for being a christian is perhaps a sense of understanding and the relief of having a really good ally.

Even the bible will tell you, wicked people will recieve an easy life, Good people will not, and being a good person requires casting off pride (thats why its so sickening to see how politics is going, both sides are becoming pride oriented)

sorry I went into a lot, but I really really want to help you. I wish I knew you so I could continue this discussion but since I dont I hope I left enough information to really really help a fellow truth seaker.

one last tip

dont forget that the only thing that guides the Christian faith is the bible, everything else is supplemental.

not a christian or a jew. just expressing my opinion on the historicity of events in the bible

my point in posting this picture is that if a deluge had just happened then the animals would be considered an isolated population which always and obesrvably results in a very rapid and diverse process of evolution. its a basic scientific principle

Wow. I've never once thought of it like this. Is there a book that goes deeper into this? Outside of the Bible?

Ah my bad user. Sorry. Thought you were op or someone else still stuck on religion

Ancient Israel- Lester L. Grabbe is a great overview although a bit bland at times
David and Solomon- Israel Finkelstein and Neil Asher Silberman - basically what I've posted is summarizing content from this
Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible- Karel van der Toorn - important for understanding how the OT books came about and has an interesting analysis of Deuteronomy trying to break apart the different stages of its development

Don't read the bible firstly. Stick to the Torah. It's closer to fact than the garbage that the Christians preach and read.

World becomes corrupt, God gets fed up and floods the world so something new can emerge.

How does something emerge from nothing? If he killed off everyone bar a group of mary-sues, how would anything new emerge?

then why does genesis show the ancestry of every group of humans the Jews knew about through Noah's 3 sons?

According to the story, not that I believe in the literal interpretation, all the animals aboard the ark and Noah's family repopulated the Earth.

1 Samuel 13:5

Now the Philistines assembled to fight with Israel, 30,000 chariots and 6,000 horsemen, and people like the sand which is on the seashore in abundance; and they came up and camped in Michmash, east of Beth-aven.

kek, horses never went into battle unattached to chariots before the latter end of the assyrian empire

>another christian thread

I shit in the throat of that whore of a balding virgin and my farts include the holy spirit.

ow the edge

Philistines themselves were Not more than 25,000 counting all the inhabitants of The pentapoleis lol, how could They have ab army larger than thenselves (and egyptians)

As a kid it was explained to me that there was a large flood that occured in the "cradle" of civilization. If it did occur, I don't think literally every animal on earth came to the ark and that literally the whole world was flooded.

owlcation.com/humanities/What-Do-Those-First-Few-Chapters-of-Genesis-Really-Say

OP here. This article answered every question I had regarding Genesis. Thank you so much to the person who recommended that I look into pre-Adamism. You've saved my faith. Here's the article for anyone who's had the same struggles.

Thank you to everyone who responded and tried to help me out. You're amazing. God bless you.

>Another "Humanities" thread
Is what you meant

Yup. This is me. I want to believe so bad bur the book is so full of inconsistencies and historical and scientific mistakes that the cognitive dissonance becomes too great to handle. Christians who believe the OT is metaphorical must admit that they are deists with Christian coloring, and could as easily change the coloring to a Muslim or a Platonic or Aristotelian coloring and still believe in the existence of some God or higher power. And that's what I consider myself today, a culturally Christian deist. But I won't insist that the Bible is somehow special let alone true.

No early Christian ever believed this though. The story is that the all of humanity fell through Adam and was saved through Christ. Romans 5:12-18

It may have saved you faith, but your faith is something different from the teaching of the Bible and Christian theology throughout the ages.

How does the article contradict that? Humanity can still fall through Adam.

Like I said, you'd be hard pressed to find any Christian before the rise of American "order-your-own-faith-would-you-like-fries-with-that?" Christianity. Sure the article may not contradict that, but you're believing in a new gospel and hat somehow all Christians before you until now got it wrong.

I'm fine as long as it's scripturally sound. Human interpretation is fallible.

It's not just a question of human interpretation being fallible. It's that somehow before you (and the guy that wrote the article) no Christian got it right throughout its 2000-year history. Really convenient.

Who's to say there weren't multiple ships?

We didn't have the technology to understand our environment so clearly like we do now. Naturally, new interpretations will arise. And just for the record, pre-adamism has been around for centuries.

>pre-adamism has been around for centuries
Yes among pagans, atheists and heretics.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pre-Adamite

How will your new cult be called?

It's a story, not a scientific discription of actual events. This is one of the biggest mistakes of modernity, conflating science and religion. One is about arriving at the most accurate and objective description of the world outside, the other is about meaning , purpose and values, so mainly about what is within ourselves.

Anyway, the story is about a man who lives in a world consumed by evil and sin. Noah is a man who is chosen by God to escape this world of evil, which will eventually destroy itself, to go to a different, better world that is based on the Commandments of God. This would've resonated with the Jews, as it would be a great parallel with the story of Moses, who escapes from Egypt to start his own religious society, based on the Word of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, as it was revealed to him.

So the story is essentially a retelling of an even older version from Mesopotamia, repurposed to fit the needs of the new religious movement that Moses started and that would eventually be Judaism. It deals with themes such as impending doom, a destructive evil engulfing everything and escaping from this evil and leaving everything behind to start over. These themes still resonate with people, particularly someone who left an old, destructive life behind to start over in a new life, guided by transcendental values. At least it does to me

>It's abundantly clear that the animals of the world didn't come from a single ship

If you are a christian and believe in God it does not matter if it is possible, because you believe in supernatural powers

So the Bible has no more factual truth to it than Aesop's fables? So why base a religion on one rather than the other?

Consonance.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isaac_La_Peyrère

I don't recognize the authority of the Catholic Church.

Nature, which God created, shows that animals have been evolving in their respective environments for millions of years.

>Catholic Church
Or any orthodox and evangelical one for that matter. Like I said, a cult. But hey, whatever floats your boat.

How so? Everything is in scripture. You're just name calling at this point. That's immature.

That depends on what you mean by factual. If by 'factual', you mean measurable in a quantitative way, then no, the Bible definitely isn't factual. It and literature in general is far too complex and far too qualitative by its nature to be quantified in a mathematical fashion.

Now, to answer your second question, the fact that the Bible has survived as the central work for so many peoples and cultures for so long does tell you it's a significant work. The logic behind this is known as the Lindy effect, which basically states that if something has been around for 100 years, there's a pretty good chance it will survive 100 more years. The Bible, and Abrahamic religion in general has been the standard of human morality for roughly 3000 years. It has inspired at least three of the most influential religions in the world, two of which have been competing for about 1400 years for the biggest religion in the world.

Now all of that is material success, which I know full well, doesn't have to be because of any objective merits. However, my subjective experience tells me that the values in the Bible, which are about human dignity for all people (not all of it, some parts of the Bible are admittedly very nasty), are the main reason why its values are so successful and so widespread and tells me that the chance that it will be replced by something completely different any time soon is pretty slim

>It's a story, not a scientific discription of actual events. This is one of the biggest mistakes of modernity, conflating science and religion.
Nice meme. Can you name one person who believed this regarding the flood before the modern period?

It's not name calling. It's an entirely new religion and the only authority you could cite was a 16th century heretic that believed the Jewish messiah would come and rule with the king of France.

It's not an entirely new religion.

Origen

I get your point. I really do. The Bible is a really important, valuable book. But that just won't do it for me. It's not enough to command faith.

That's, like, a total bummer, dude. Sorry.