Noah's Flood...

ed · Post by ed » Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:47 pm

archaeologist wrote:armchair and monday morning quarterbacks are all you are.

the ball is still in your court and the challenge is still on. but i highly doubtr anyone will venture and 'evidence' to prove their side, by the guidelines i set.

it is easier for you to mock than it is to produce something credible that remotely supports your side of the debate.

well now it is up to you to produce or be silent about the biblical account.

I thought that there were two accounts. Which one?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 4:57 pm

ed wrote:
archaeologist wrote:armchair and monday morning quarterbacks are all you are.

the ball is still in your court and the challenge is still on. but i highly doubtr anyone will venture and 'evidence' to prove their side, by the guidelines i set.

it is easier for you to mock than it is to produce something credible that remotely supports your side of the debate.

well now it is up to you to produce or be silent about the biblical account.
I thought that there were two accounts. Which one?

First off it is Wednesday.

Second, we are not "quaterbacks," we are MEAN.

Third, we produced a rather devestating treatment of your delusions--you just merely run away from it.

Still cannot choose which myth to believe, I see. I mean, come on! Noah has to know how many of each animal to bring on!

Think of the children. . . .

--J.D.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:25 pm

I prefer the Sumerian account.

It isn't true, either but at least it has age on its side.

ed · Post by ed » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:33 pm

Minimalist wrote:I prefer the Sumerian account.

It isn't true, either but at least it has age on its side.

Sumarian chicks are hot

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 5:34 pm

If you throw them in the fire.

ed · Post by ed » Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:25 pm

Minimalist wrote:If you throw them in the fire.

That is a god thing.

I wonder why men created a psyhcotic diety? How odd. Murder, genocide, rape and pillage. Grovelling and sacrifice. It is repellent.

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 6:46 pm

ed stumbles over the $47.38 question--American money, not Canadian play-money.

Kindly thank the satan you tripped over. They do not get enough credit.

Why would you worship a Zeus or an Ares? Not nice people.

Why, if the Conquest never happened and much of the DH [Saul-Kings--Ed.] is mythic would anyone make it up?

Same reason the Abimelek stories exist [What?--Ed.] One of the version is "hey! YHWH will kick foreign kings!"

Same reason Rambo wins the Vietnam War every ten years and St. Mel of Gibson personally defeats the British--who killed Jesus--repeatedly throughout history.

The writers wanted a glorious past where the did squish people as others like the Assyrians are able to squish them! A Joseph is a "Johnny Tremain" with a more mature understanding of sex and a better writer.

"OUR God," the reasoning goes, "had us wipe out entire cities!!!"

This reminds me of some of my ancient--and past--Polish relatives who insist we are related to Polish royalty. Being related to Polish royalty is about one step above being related to Irish Royalty--it was impressive for an hour on the second Tuesday of September in 1047 CE, but other than that, who gives a shit?

As Minimalist demonstrates with his nice summary in one of these threads, the writers react to having lost land, being moved, having other people move in. There is a modern analogy--Israel: the movement to validate the ancient history so as to claim "we ALWAYS" had a right to the land.

Heck, you got that idiot writing the fatuous pap of How the Irish Saved Civilization, you have the Afrocentrist movement--all modern examples of trying to have a more interesting past then one thinks one actually has.

Part of the message of the wonderful film True Believer--about a Jew who joins a Neo-Nazi group--is that the character wants to be the oppressor for once.

I could go on.

--J.D.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:28 pm

This reminds me of some of my ancient--and past--Polish relatives who insist we are related to Polish royalty. Being related to Polish royalty is about one step above being related to Irish Royalty--it was impressive for an hour on the second Tuesday of September in 1047 CE, but other than that, who gives a shit?

john · Post by **john** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:35 pm

regarding the whole hideous assumption of mountains, with regard to the flood:

as the earth is well known to be flat

the flood did engulf the entire plane surface.

the addition of higher ground was

invented by later apologists.

can't have the ark coming to rest on a damn near infinite mudflat.

would have been beneath noah's dignity.

john

marduk · Post by **marduk** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:40 pm

thats a nice idea
but the earliest accounts all mention mountains
they just don't say Global

john · Post by **john** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:42 pm

marduk wrote:thats a nice idea
but the earliest accounts all mention mountains
they just don't say Global

forgeries.

j

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 7:53 pm

like i said; just as in evolution you couldn't step up to the plate nor can you do it with this topic.

let's see if 'you can put your money where your mouth is'.

Post by **Minimalist** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:18 pm

Are you still prattling on abour freakin' Noah?

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 8:33 pm

that's the topic at hand.

still waiting...

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Sep 06, 2006 9:00 pm

The actual myths require the coverage of mountains.

Searches through his sources . . . "oh, that is where that lithograph went!"

Here be a summary I did:

The relevant passages are:

J: Gen 7:19-20
P: Gen 8:1-2a; 3b-5

And the waters had grown very, very strong on the earth, so they covered all the high mountains that are under all the skies. Fifteen cubits above, the waters grew stronger, and they covered the mountains.

And Elohim remembered Noah and all the wild animals and all the domestic animals that were with him in the ark, and Elohim passed a wind over the earth, and the water decreased. And the fountains of the deep and the apertures of the skies were shut, and the water receded at the end of a hundred fifty days. And the ark rested in the seventh month, in the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. And the water went on receding until the tenth month. In the tenth month, in the first of the month, the tops of the mountains appeared.

Quod erat demonstratum

So where are these "fountains of the deep" and "apertures of the skies?" described in the P story? As Friedman notes, in the P Creation Myth a firmament separates waters above and below it. "The universe in that story is thus a habitable bubble surrounded by water. This same conception is assumed in the P flood story, in which the 'apertures of the skies' and the 'fountains of the great deep' are broken up so that the waters flow in."

Reference:

Friedman RE. The Bible with Sources Revealed. San Francisco: Harper Collins, 2003.