A question about Noah's ark.

Nobody has put forth the possibility that Noah was a Gallifreyian and that the ark was, in point of fact, a big honking tardis. Space considerations now moot.
 
Cool. That had absolutely nothing to do with the posts of yours I was quoting.

Zack. You cannot be helped. You refuse to put in the necessary effort on your end. (Let me give you a hint anyways: I AM THE AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE on what my posts mean. Stop trying to pretend you know what I said or did not say better than I do.)

I care about these sorts of details because if the Bible is meant to be taken as a literal, historical, scientific truth, then we assume that there is literally history and science behind everything that's in the Bible, and therefore, there can be no anachronisms.

Already starting on the wrong foot, hardy har har.

Big shot farmer had a boat. Some river is flooded and he puts all his lifestock on a boat. Flood goes away, he strands, lets the animals out, goes to a nearby bar which just opened after the flood and tells his account to the barkeep. The god he prayed to at the time is mentioned as having guarded him against the flood. The barkeep likes the story and tells it to his other customers, who get home and tell it to their family, who go to the market and tell it to some vendors. Some priest overhears and puts it in a sermon, emphasizing the role God must have played in saving this man.

After a couple of hundred years of spicing up the story, we got the story of Noah's ark.

Plausible.

Where did all the contradictory accounts come from?

...

It's that delusional.

And those civilizations all forgot the whole ... thing

i) Where did they come from? Good question.

ii) Humans are easily deluded, so yeah.

iii) In the light of the above, it's not so hard for people to forget things. Throw in some death and destruction for good measure.
 
Askthepizzaguy wins this thread. :king:

The only explanation that we can truly derive from the story of Noah's ark is that it was meant to be a parable, because the story happening verbatim is impossible on several fronts.
 
The only explanation that we can truly derive from the story of Noah's ark is that it was meant to be a parable, because the story happening verbatim is impossible on several fronts.

I'm told that a lot of Jewish people used to believe this (or still do). The question of whether or not the stories were literal facts and scientifically true doesn't matter as much as the question "what does this story say about life and what can I learn from it?"
 
Well, if the Great Flood covered every point on Earth, with sufficient depth for the Ark to float upon, that is a LOT of water in just 40 days. Let me see - Mt Everest is 8,848 metres high, which means there had to be 221.2 metres of rainfall every day, just to reach the height of Mt Everest.

After all, the Bible is literal, scientific fact, and if it says that 40 days of rainfall covered the earth, that means the entire Earth, not just the Middle East, and it means 40 days, not "an unspecified period of time".
 
I just read on wikipedia that one explanation is marine fossils that exist in many places and there's another theory that it may have to do with tsunamis or great floods that occurred around the world in prehistoric times. Middle Easterners, Greeks, Chinese and Native Americans all have great flood myths. Dragons may have to do with fossils of dinosaurs.
Most of the province of BC where I live used to be on the bottom of the ocean, all of our fossils here are from marine species. What makes it even more interesting is that my province is also extremely mountainous, and way the hell up in the rockies there are some really cool sites where they dig out 1000s of fossils of marine animals. A people with no knowledge of tectonic plates and how mountains are created would easily become confused about that (though I don't know if the native americans ever found or had stories about fossils high up in the mountains). Here on the coast, the major island of Vancouver Island (FYI: the city of Vancouver which is on the mainland, they are just named after the same guy) also contains many fossils of marine life, but the island actually migrated up here from the south pacific so it has entirely different species in the fossil record :D

As for Noah's ark, yeah the way it is described in the bible is impossible. My favourite reading of it though is by Ricky Gervais when he read the (rather badly done) children's book of the story of noah's ark he got as a kid from attending sunday school.
 
I'm told that a lot of Jewish people used to believe this (or still do). The question of whether or not the stories were literal facts and scientifically true doesn't matter as much as the question "what does this story say about life and what can I learn from it?"
Well, on that point - the only sensible point worth discussion IMO - what can we learn from this story?? What is the moral? "Don't be bad, or God may kill you"?

I'll agree that the story of Noah can at most be taken as a parable, but for what purpose?
 
Well there is no need for the fish to be in the ark, since they live in water and it was only air breathing animals they needed to bring onto the ship. The amount of animals needed to be brought in is not that large and having juvenile animals means they are not fully grown and it is only after the time of being on the ark for 1 year. Have alook at this link to get a better answer on the issue at hand.
http://aufiles.creation.com/images/pdfs/cabook/chapter14.pdf

@CetlicEmpire. I think it is best not to use the word "microevolution", since it is not change that we are challenging, but the type of change is what is needed. Evolution states that due to gradual changes we have evolved from bacteria, but the problem with that is that we just do see any changes of the sort that are required for that to happen, that being, increase in useful and specific information. Any of the mutations we see happening now do not give hope to the situation, since the best case scenario seen is basically just change of diet for bacteria and not the mutational change needed to turn a microbe to a microbiologist, the field that was started by Pasteur, a creationist, I must add.

Years of education into biology and I'd never realized these problems. Nor have the millions of other people who's job it is to think about these things. It's as if we were all standing there, wondering, "how did the genome increase in complexity?" and answered, "magic!" because answering "god" would have been unacceptable to us atheists. Now you've come along with these insights that are sure to rock molecular biology to it's core. You might just win a Nobel for this, CH.

... or not. It takes quite a bit of gumption to assume scientists are this stupid. Here's one answer for how a genome can increase in complexity: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gene_duplication
 
The problem with the above is that if some river floods, then why did they not just move from the place they were living? It is not that hard to do. There have been plenty of such floods happen through out history, but we don't see these floods becoming things of legend and myth if they happen everywhere, we would seee so many of such stories, but the ones we have are about a global flood.
Is your criticism my story is not as plausible as a global flood story? Yeah, that's a riot. There have been plenty of floods where a farmer has put all his lifestock on a boat? Please do share with me the historical records of which you based this claim on. Or please read a post before feeling the need to start a post with: "the problem with the above".
 
Well, on that point - the only sensible point worth discussion IMO - what can we learn from this story?? What is the moral? "Don't be bad, or God may kill you"?

I'll agree that the story of Noah can at most be taken as a parable, but for what purpose?

As an atheist, I can't speak for religious people. But it seems to be a story about the omnipotence of god, humans were evil enough to justify their genocide, and the promise god made not to destroy the world again with a flood.

It could be a story just to explain the existence of rainbows...

Didn't Noah also get heckled by people while he built his ark? Maybe it's something to do with following god's word despite public humiliation. Or people get what they have coming to them.

Just spitballin' here.
 
The problem with the above is that if some river floods, then why did they not just move from the place they were living? It is not that hard to do. There have been plenty of such floods happen through out history, but we don't see these floods becoming things of legend and myth if they happen everywhere, we would seee so many of such stories, but the ones we have are about a global flood.
Its not easy to just pick everything up and move, while the river's floods were what fertilized the soil and were an annual event a bad flood could wipe out everything, including any food stores. You also must remember that people back then had absolutely no idea how large the world actually was, so a huge flood one year that was bad enough to be retold (along with the influence of the river flooding every year anyway) could easily take on a larger than life image in the story. Oral traditions are only reliable for about 300 years before they become more myth than fact.

As an atheist, I can't speak for religious people. But it seems to be a story about the omnipotence of god, humans were evil enough to justify their genocide, and the promise god made not to destroy the world again with a flood.
It wasn't just genocide of people (who's bad behaviour caused the flood) but the genocide of EVERY LIVING SPECIES just because some humans were misbehaving. Really it just makes yahweh look like a genocidal maniac mad with power.
 
It wasn't just genocide of people (who's bad behaviour caused the flood) but the genocide of EVERY LIVING SPECIES just because some humans were misbehaving. Really it just makes yahweh look like a genocidal maniac mad with power.

It's odd how the omnipotent god couldn't just "poof" the bad people away...
 
It's odd how the omnipotent god couldn't just "poof" the bad people away...
Omnipotent??

Iron chariots > God

Judges 1:19 (King James Version) said:
And the LORD was with Judah; and he drave out the inhabitants of the mountain; but could not drive out the inhabitants of the valley, because they had chariots of iron.

If you ever wondered what you need to defend yourself during the apocalypse. ;)
 
If you ever wondered what you need to defend yourself during the apocalypse. ;)

Typical response might be that "he" refers to Judah and not god. So it was Judah that couldn't handle the iron chariots, not god. But still, if god is on your side than it must have been God's intent to not let Judah win.
 
For all of you "scientist" arguing out there, I am surprised you are arguing using known folklore. I thought this was a scientific question? It seems that only Vancouver has even come close. How much salt are we talking about? Why is the salt sea so salty? Why do islands form over night? Why is there a pangea history? Did the flood cause the first division? Were there two divisions? Is 14,000 years related to the moon calender or sun? Will we all die if the oceans continue to get saltier? What is the topic of this thread?
 
Are you people actually suggesting that a supreme deity capable of creating a deluge to cover the earth could not deal with such a minor inconvenience such as salinity factors and keep the fish alive? That is just laughable.
 
Lets pretend for a moment that this story is true.

If you would like answers, don't make statements like these. The story is true.

What about the fish?

I don't think it matters. The fish never died, since they can live underwater...

@Cheetah- I think that's a reference to the Jews. The Jews were fearful and afraid, so God "Couldn't" free them since they had no faith...
 
Are you people actually suggesting that a supreme deity capable of creating a deluge to cover the earth could not deal with such a minor inconvenience such as salinity factors and keep the fish alive? That is just laughable.

This deity needed help from a mere mortal to save all the animals in the world while he killed all the humans, so it's not really a far stretch to question what he was capable of and what he wasn't.
 
Top Bottom