[hrothgar]

Curious whether any of the poster's here are willing to admit that they believe the story about Noah and the ark...

We've had quotes like the following from Luke Warm

Quote

there has always, it seems, been strife in that area and always will be... this lasts until finally (if one believes as i do) almost all countries on earth join together to wage war against israel...

And that old classic from DrTodd where he talks about Methuselah

Just curious how many Biblical literalists we have
(Noah's Ark seems like a reasonable litmus test)

[Lobowolf]

I don't, myself. I'm just posting because when I was reading the original post, the only other forum member in the topic was "Rain," which I found really funny.

[luke warm]

you should have made it a poll

[Lobowolf]

luke warm, on Mar 26 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

you should have made it a poll

That would be value-neutral, and anonymous. You're supposed to "admit" ("confess," "concede") your belief.

[Gerben42]

I believe that at the time of the origin of the story, people really thought that the whole world was being flooded and that this was an act of some supernatural being. Does that count?

[hrothgar]

Lobowolf, on Mar 27 2009, 01:12 AM, said:

luke warm, on Mar 26 2009, 05:09 PM, said:

you should have made it a poll

That would be value-neutral, and anonymous. You're supposed to "admit" ("confess," "concede") your belief.

I readily admit that I expect that many members of the forum would make a value judgment about anyone who admitted to believing in Noah's Ark...

[hrothgar]

Gerben42, on Mar 27 2009, 01:20 AM, said:

I believe that at the time of the origin of the story, people really thought that the whole world was being flooded and that this was an act of some supernatural being. Does that count?

Nope... we're talking about

"Big Boat"
two of every kind of animal
40 days and 40 nights,

all that...

[Winstonm]

It is nothing but Jewish mythology.

[Winstonm]

Quote

you should have made it a poll

I doubt making Noah Polish would change many minds.

[mike777]

I guess it is debatable whether building the Ark was a successful or failed policy decision.

[Elianna]

Winstonm, on Mar 26 2009, 03:49 PM, said:

It is nothing but Jewish mythology.

Funny, I thought that it was in the Christian Bible too. I guess I'm confused about that.

I also thought that there was a similar great flood in the Epic of Gilgamesh.

But maybe it IS just "Jewish mythology".

Anyway, I don't believe that it was literally true, though I do believe a giant flood happened, and I also view the Bible as having allegorical truths.

[jdonn]

I believe Evan Almighty was truly filmed.

[kenrexford]

Not directly on point, but I do find one passage interesting:

"In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. The earth was formless and void, and darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was moving over the surface of the waters. Then God said, "Let there be light"; and there was light. God saw that the light was good; and God separated the light from the darkness. God called the light day, and the darkness He called night. And there was evening and there was morning, one day. Then God said, "Let there be an expanse in the midst of the waters, and let it separate the waters from the waters.""

This is a really weird way for the ancients to describe creation. Very opium house.

However, I find the precise choice of words intriguing. You start out with two things -- formless, and void. Void is a lack of anything at all, and formless implies no structure to anything. You also have a lack of light (darkness). All of this sounds pre-bang.

You then have an interesting concept of "the surface of the deep." This is also strange, in that "the surface of the deep" sort of sounds like a plane, or a two-diminsional focus for what will later be a three-dimensional "deep." The juxtaposition of two-dimensional and three-dimensional is intriguing. It makes me think of artist renditions on discovery channel programs to try to explain string theory and the like. Very interesting, though, that this passage does discuss the dimensional.

What happens next is truly fascinating. First is light. Not the earth. North water. But, light. Energy first. Lots of it.

Next step? Separation of light from darkness. This is even more interesting. Implicitly, you have light intermingled with darkness, or just light, but in either event you have a next step of separating the two. Why? Brings to mind the discovery channel again and the big bang residue.

Next is the first day ending. All that is done is night and day. Still nothing solid.

After this, you get into strange discussions of waters and seas and land, where a non-literal translation might be interesting but might also break down. But, I do find it troubling how strangely on point the first few passages are with modern science IF you reinterpret the words with a modern scientific knowledge. Kind of spooky is all.

[Al_U_Card]

Bible basher vs bible thumper

Irresistible force vs immovable object?

[blackshoe]

One problem with looking at the "actual words" of the Bible is that English translations of Latin translations of Greek translations of the original whatever... well, did you ever play "telephone" as a kid?

[mike777]

blackshoe, on Mar 26 2009, 10:52 PM, said:

One problem with looking at the "actual words" of the Bible is that English translations of Latin translations of Greek translations of the original whatever... well, did you ever play "telephone" as a kid?

I have no idea what this means.


Yes we played telephone so what?

I assume there are thousands and thousands over decades who are super experts in Greek, latin, etc....

Your point is?

As for the Christian,Muslim/Jewish bible wording...your point is what? God does not exist? This is all silly..if so just say so.

[matmat]

mike777, on Mar 27 2009, 12:29 AM, said:

blackshoe, on Mar 26 2009, 10:52 PM, said:

One problem with looking at the "actual words" of the Bible is that English translations of Latin translations of Greek translations of the original whatever... well, did you ever play "telephone" as a kid?

I have no idea what this means.


Yes we played telephone so what?

I assume there are thousands and thousands over decades who are super experts in Greek, latin, etc....

Your point is?

As for the bible or jewish bible wording...your point is what? God does not exist?

this is funny.

[mike777]

matmat, on Mar 27 2009, 12:34 AM, said:

mike777, on Mar 27 2009, 12:29 AM, said:

blackshoe, on Mar 26 2009, 10:52 PM, said:

One problem with looking at the "actual words" of the Bible is that English translations of Latin translations of Greek translations of the original whatever... well, did you ever play "telephone" as a kid?

I have no idea what this means.


Yes we played telephone so what?

I assume there are thousands and thousands over decades who are super experts in Greek, latin, etc....

Your point is?

As for the bible or jewish bible wording...your point is what? God does not exist?

this is funny.

...

[dicklont]

In Holland there is a true believer who has build his own ark to "spread the word".

[helene_t]

blackshoe, on Mar 27 2009, 04:52 AM, said:

One problem with looking at the "actual words" of the Bible is that English translations of Latin translations of Greek translations of the original whatever... well, did you ever play "telephone" as a kid?

That is just a minor problem. We can still go back to the Greek version (I believe the Hebrew/Aramaic original is only partially preserved and also subject to interpretation since the languages have evolved quite a bit since then, but I could be wrong). Also I believe the most English versions are based mainly on the Greek version. At least that's the case with the official Danish version (my uncle is chairman of the Danish Bible Society).

The "telephone game" analogy is more apt for the time before the Bible was written down, and the myths existed as an oral tradition only.