Open a newspaper to the sports section and read a story about any two basketball games. Count up the times that the sportswriter uses the terms “rebound”, “hustle” and “shoe endorsement” and then try to decide which story was inspired by the other. Sometimes pieces of writing are similar because they describe similar events. You can’t just assume that two historical reports are fictional accounts and installments in a literary tradition just because word usage in them is similar.
1 Like
That’s good to know, but could it have happened in the way the story records it? Actual dates aside, I mean.
It is only an apparent indifference, a hypothetical indifference for the purpose of getting at the essence of the relevance of what you call a myth. Your example of a nuclear meltdown supposes that such a meltdown actually happened or could viably have happened. The issue with the global flood is that people claim it could not have happened, not only because of the apparent date of it, but because of the magnitude, the size of the ark, the number of animals, the length of time, how did animals spread, etc. The story of a nuclear meltdown would be meaningless if we did not understand what nuclear power was, and that nuclear power actually exists. The main problems with the date from an archaelogical perspective, as far as I know, center around the dates of the pyramids, and the difference is in the hundreds of years. All in all, it is quite likely that eventually this discrepancy can be resolved, one way or another.
The dates or time of the flood is not as significant, if it can be shown that some ancestors were missed or skipped in the geneology, or if there is a C14 error in carbon dating, or perhaps some as yet unknown factor to account for the discrepancy. If the flood happened 2000 years earlier, for example, but happened as described, the impact and the flood story would still make sense and be relevant. (However, I will continue to deliberately dance around the exact date, just as you insist on a global flood that never happened. Although I will defend a younger date, and challenge “millions of years” every time.) But if it did not ever happen, then we have the vision of some scribe or group of scribes imagining a dramatic story that would highlight the evil of the world, and God’s judgement on it, in the midst of showing very specific detailed care of a particular righteous family who is saved from this judgement. But, like the book of Mormon, which is also written to imitate a particular biblical style, it is a fabrication, showing an apparent truth, with no significant basis in fact. Because of its lack of authenticity, it lacks the authority it requires, and is difficult to distinguish from wishful thinking.
A symbol is not balderdash, because it represents something. A myth however has a primary characteristic that distinguishes it from historical narrative, and that characteristic is its lack of reality, its lack of believability, its non-historicity, its falseness. The fact that it may convey some type of message or lesson does not diminish this lack of believability. The message comes more from its sense of analogy than it does from the facts portrayed within the myth, since the facts are false.
If we were to call the tale of evolution a myth, everyone would understand exactly what is implied, without further explanation.
As far as my last paragraph is concerned, it was a general statement, not specifically directed towards the discussion on evolution, but rather perhaps a bit of agreement on the possibility that God will not judge us primarily on how we understand evolution or Genesis 1-11, but rather on the obedience that comes from faith in Christ. I personally think some doctrines are over simplified and too doctrinaire. Sometimes we just have to go back to scripture, and recognize that God saves us by grace (Christ’s sacrifice) through faith, which is revealed in obedience. And Jesus explained that obedience is not always revealed in preaching and in healing the sick, but in caring for the less fortunate, and demonstrating the love of Christ, bearing fruit for Him.
1 Like
It is good to look at the larger context, rather than only one or two words. The passage indicates the raven kept on flying around and didn’t return, while the dove did. So they had different requirements for resting. Potentially a raven could have rested on a floating carcass, or a floating log, while the dove wanted a dry spot, preferably on a live tree. The ground was wet, even if no longer entirely flooded. But a week later, there it was, the plant or tree had sprouted leaves, of which the dove brought one back (for the mate?) … but the dove did return. One more week, and plants and trees had grown enough that the dove had no need to come back.
There is nothing indicated about Noah’s vantage point, and a dove would fly higher than the ark. And we could assume that Noah saw the tops of the mountains in the tenth month, and that after 40 more days he thought perhaps the earth might have some sufficiently dry spots. And within another two weeks it was so.
6 Then it came about at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made; 7 and he sent out a raven, and it [b]flew here and there until the water was dried up [c]from the earth. 8 Then he sent out a dove from him, to see if the water was abated from the face of the land; 9 but the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, so she returned to him into the ark, for the water was on the [d]surface of all the earth. Then he put out his hand and took her, and brought her into the ark to himself. 10 So he waited yet another seven days; and again he sent out the dove from the ark. 11 The dove came to him toward [e]evening, and behold, in her [f]beak was a freshly picked olive leaf. So Noah knew that the water was abated from the earth.
There is no real evidence for a local flood. None.
Doc Eddie,
I do not fail to talk about the biblical text, nor do I express only the opinions of others. I express those opinions because I consider the possibilities of others. I have my own opinions and express them as well. As far as my name, you can call me anything as long as it is not vulgar. You do not have to call me doc. I was simply making a point that you seem to fail to miss. When I mention the opinion of others, it is because it supports my thesis. As for my acceptance of a Theistic view of creation, I can accept any view of Christian Theism in reference to creation. God has the power to use any model. My point to you is this: Respect other people and their views. As treating me as an academic peer, you are doing then the right thing. I do detect a bit of anger in your writing at times, and I believe I am right. Have a nice day and do not get so hot under the collar. I have based my exegesis with you on one word: the meaning of earth. The flood does not have to be literally universal; on the contrary, it was universal that it touched human life on the earth at that time. Earth should be referred to as “land,” therefore, a local flood with universal effects. As for quoting other sources, all scholars do that. It gives support to a particular thesis. You know that. I wish to add more about myself. I have done many things in my life, clergyman (Lutheran Missouri Synod, United Methodist Church, and Southern Baptist Convention). Bank of America is not interested in what degree that one has. They only want educated people from many back grounds. I was a loan officer, officer in the Credit Card Division, and National Training Officer. I have also studied banking and finance; therefore, I have several degrees. I also served as a translator for the president of the corporation. I do not wish to mention anything else. I must mention that I have been a teacher of history, philosophy, English, and German. I have been an instructor at Old Dominion University. I also was a university librarian for a while. I am somewhat like C.S. Lewis, aren’t I? I have always had a strong faith in God. May God bless you.
I would add a fourth option that God may have done it in a way that we cannot detect or understand, given how little we know of how the universe works and how we know even less (and will never be able to fully comprehend) of what God can and cannot do. There are several ways in which this can be true but I’ll speculate on just two scenarios to illustrate how the polar opposites represented in this discussion (“myth” vs “real”) may not be the only possible choices.
The first scenario I’d mention is that God is not bound by our perception of time and He can see all possible outcomes of all possible events. As such, it could well be the case that the flood happened in a different time line so its physical effects would not be detectable to us. As @Eddie points out, what the story teaches would not be diminished in this scenario and, as @johnZ points out, the impact of God actually having done it would also not be compromised. The second scenario is the possibility of us living in a multiverse where many different outcomes may somehow occur simultaneously. This scenario is similar to the first option but it multiplexes space instead of time.
Back to a more “common” perception of reality, the point is - this question may not be decidable with the limited knowledge we have at this stage in time so it is premature to question the inerrancy of the Bible on whether we can or cannot reconcile what it says with our limited perception and understanding of reality.
2 Likes
I like your response very much and can see what you are saying. I will study the text as you suggested and come up with possible conclusions. I know you are a fine scholar and I respect you. After church tomorrow, I will make a study of the text in question. There is merit in what you are saying. I wish Patrick would come to Christ too; however, God gives him the free will to accept what he wishes. I am a two point Calvinist and a two Arminian. I do not believe that God elects people to salvation or damnation, we make that choice. Christ offers salvation to all who accept him. I will consider what you say and I will try to get back tomorrow. You are a good person, Eddie. God bless.
1 Like
@johnZ I think that the idea that a raven is not afraid to get its feet muddy on a log, but that a dove is so fastidious that it will only land on a green tree, that concept is based on symbolism and not on fact. Doves are not above taking water at a “mud hole”. http://www.huntland.com/hunting-tips/dove/
I apologize in advance for the long post, but the easiest way to see that the verses about Noah describe a local flood, is to simply cut and paste those verses into a Word doc’ then do a find-and-replace of the word “earth” to the word “land” which is the more appropriate translation from the original Hebrew word Eretz. So, here ya go.
6 Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the , and daughters were born to them, 2 that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose.
3 And the LORD said, “My Spirit shall not strive[a] with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years.” 4 There were giants on the land in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown.
5 Then the LORD[b] saw that the wickedness of man was great in the land, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. 6 And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the land, and He was grieved in His heart. 7 So the LORD said, “I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the land, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them.” 8 But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD.
Noah Pleases God
9 This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. 10 And Noah begot three sons: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.
11 The land also was corrupt before God, and the land was filled with violence.12 So God looked upon the land, and indeed it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted their way on the land.
The Ark Prepared
13 And God said to Noah, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the land is filled with violence through them; and behold, I will destroy them with the land. 14 Make yourself an ark of gopherwood; make rooms in the ark, and cover it inside and outside with pitch. 15 And this is how you shall make it: The length of the ark shall be three hundred cubits, its width fifty cubits, and its height thirty cubits. 16 You shall make a window for the ark, and you shall finish it to a cubit from above; and set the door of the ark in its side. You shall make it with lower, second, and third decks. 17 And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the land, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which is the breath of life; everything that is on the land shall die. 18 But I will establish My covenant with you; and you shall go into the ark—you, your sons, your wife, and your sons’ wives with you. 19 And of every living thing of all flesh you shall bring two of every sort into the ark, to keep them alive with you; they shall be male and female. 20 Of the birds after their kind, of animals after their kind, and of every creeping thing of the land after its kind, two of every kind will come to you to keep them alive. 21 And you shall take for yourself of all food that is eaten, and you shall gather it to yourself; and it shall be food for you and for them.”
22 Thus Noah did; according to all that God commanded him, so he did.
7 Then the LORD said to Noah, “Come into the ark, you and all your household, because I have seen that you are righteous before Me in this generation. 2 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; 3 also seven each of birds of the air, male and female, to keep the species alive on the face of all the land. 4 For after seven more days I will cause it to rain on the land forty days and forty nights, and I will destroy from the face of the land all living things that I have made.” 5 And Noah did according to all that the LORD commanded him. 6 Noah was six hundred years old when the floodwaters were on the land.
7 So Noah, with his sons, his wife, and his sons’ wives, went into the ark because of the waters of the flood. 8 Of clean animals, of animals that are unclean, of birds, and of everything that creeps on the land, 9 two by two they went into the ark to Noah, male and female, as God had commanded Noah.10 And it came to pass after seven days that the waters of the flood were on the land. 11 In the six hundredth year of Noah’s life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, on that day all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened. 12 And the rain was on the land forty days and forty nights.
13 On the very same day Noah and Noah’s sons, Shem, Ham, and Japheth, and Noah’s wife and the three wives of his sons with them, entered the ark—14 they and every beast after its kind, all cattle after their kind, every creeping thing that creeps on the land after its kind, and every bird after its kind, every bird of every sort. 15 And they went into the ark to Noah, two by two, of all flesh in which is the breath of life. 16 So those that entered, male and female of all flesh, went in as God had commanded him; and the LORD shut him in.
17 Now the flood was on the land forty days. The waters increased and lifted up the ark, and it rose high above the land. 18 The waters prevailed and greatly increased on the land, and the ark moved about on the surface of the waters. 19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly on the land, and all the high hills under the whole heaven were covered. 20 The waters prevailed fifteen cubits upward, and the mountains were covered. 21 And all flesh died that moved on the land: birds and cattle and beasts and every creeping thing that creeps on the land, and every man. 22 All in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit[a] of life, all that was on the dry land, died. 23 So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the land. Only Noah and those who were with him in the ark remained alive. 24 And the waters prevailed on the land one hundred and fifty days.
8 Then God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the animals that were with him in the ark. And God made a wind to pass over the land, and the waters subsided. 2 The fountains of the deep and the windows of heaven were also stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained. 3 And the waters receded continually from the land. At the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. 4 Then the ark rested in the seventh month, the seventeenth day of the month, on the mountains of Ararat. 5 And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month. In the tenth month, on the first day of the month, the tops of the mountains were seen.
6 So it came to pass, at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. 7 Then he sent out a raven, which kept going to and fro until the waters had dried up from the land. 8 He also sent out from himself a dove, to see if the waters had receded from the face of the ground.9 But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned into the ark to him, for the waters were on the face of the whole land. So he put out his hand and took her, and drew her into the ark to himself. 10 And he waited yet another seven days, and again he sent the dove out from the ark.11 Then the dove came to him in the evening, and behold, a freshly plucked olive leaf was in her mouth; and Noah knew that the waters had receded from the land. 12 So he waited yet another seven days and sent out the dove, which did not return again to him anymore.
13 And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, that the waters were dried up from the land; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and indeed the surface of the ground was dry. 14 And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the land was dried.
15 Then God spoke to Noah, saying, 16 “Go out of the ark, you and your wife, and your sons and your sons’ wives with you. 17 Bring out with you every living thing of all flesh that is with you: birds and cattle and every creeping thing that creeps on the land, so that they may abound on the land, and be fruitful and multiply on the land.” 18 So Noah went out, and his sons and his wife and his sons’ wives with him. 19 Every animal, every creeping thing, every bird, and whatever creeps on the land, according to their families, went out of the ark.
God’s Covenant with Creation
20 Then Noah built an altar to the LORD, and took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings on the altar. 21 And the LORD smelled a soothing aroma. Then the LORD said in His heart, “I will never again curse the ground for man’s sake, although the imagination of man’s heart is evil from his youth; nor will I again destroy every living thing as I have done.
22 “While the land remains,
Seedtime and harvest,
Cold and heat,
Winter and summer,
And day and night
Shall not cease.”
9 So God blessed Noah and his sons, and said to them: “Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the land.[a] 2 And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be on every beast of the land, on every bird of the air, on all that move on the land, and on all the fish of the sea. They are given into your hand. 3 Every moving thing that lives shall be food for you. I have given you all things, even as the green herbs. 4 But you shall not eat flesh with its life, that is, its blood.5 Surely for your lifeblood I will demand a reckoning; from the hand of every beast I will require it, and from the hand of man. From the hand of every man’s brother I will require the life of man.
6 “Whoever sheds man’s blood,
By man his blood shall be shed;
For in the image of God
He made man.
7 And as for you, be fruitful and multiply;
Bring forth abundantly in the land
And multiply in it.”
8 Then God spoke to Noah and to his sons with him, saying: 9 “And as for Me, behold, I establish My covenant with you and with your descendants[b] after you, 10 and with every living creature that is with you: the birds, the cattle, and every beast of the land with you, of all that go out of the ark, every beast of the land. 11 Thus I establish My covenant with you: Never again shall all flesh be cut off by the waters of the flood; never again shall there be a flood to destroy the land.”
12 And God said: “This is the sign of the covenant which I make between Me and you, and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:13 I set My rainbow in the cloud, and it shall be for the sign of the covenant between Me and the land. 14 It shall be, when I bring a cloud over the land, that the rainbow shall be seen in the cloud; 15 and I will remember My covenant which is between Me and you and every living creature of all flesh; the waters shall never again become a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 The rainbow shall be in the cloud, and I will look on it to remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is on the land.” 17 And God said to Noah, “This is the sign of the covenant which I have established between Me and all flesh that is on the land.”
Noah and His Sons
18 Now the sons of Noah who went out of the ark were Shem, Ham, and Japheth. And Ham was the father of Canaan. 19 These three were the sons of Noah, and from these the whole land was populated.
20 And Noah began to be a farmer, and he planted a vineyard. 21 Then he drank of the wine and was drunk, and became uncovered in his tent. 22 And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. 23 But Shem and Japheth took a garment, laid it on both their shoulders, and went backward and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were turned away, and they did not see their father’s nakedness.
24 So Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done to him. 25 Then he said:
“Cursed be Canaan;
A servant of servants
He shall be to his brethren.”
26 And he said:
“Blessed be the LORD,
The God of Shem,
And may Canaan be his servant.
27 May God enlarge Japheth,
And may he dwell in the tents of Shem;
And may Canaan be his servant.”
28 And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years. 29 So all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years; and he died.
I have been thinking about this for awhile and come to a conclusion. Before I attempt to do a quick and short exegesis, I wish to quote Denis O. Lamoureux. I may not agree with him totally; however, he is a fellow scholar and should be included. I quote:
Genesis 1-11 is similar to these genres in that it has remnants of actual history. A local flood and even a flood hero are undoubtedly behind the numerous flood accounts in the ancient Near East, including the J and P versions later redacted into Genesis 6-9.
When I think about this, I feel like a jurist that must make a decision in a court of law. I must weigh the evidence and debate on both sides. I must admit that the use of the word earth to prove a local flood account is weak; however, when we consider that ancient man thought the earth was flat and not all that big, the local flood argument could be valid. We must remember that the Apostle Paul thought that the Roman world was the world; therefore, we must consider what these ancient writers meant by the earth. I will say this: Eddie is right in that the Bible considers it to be the whole earth; however, did the ancients really consider the earth to be as big as it is. There is another factor here that we should consider: The Holy Spirit of God who inspired these ancient writers. He surely knew how big our world and universe must have been; therefore, I believe the Holy Spirit meant the whole world as he knew it. For this reason, I must conclude that the entire world was meant and both Eddie and JohnZ are correct. However, there is another question to be considered. Does geology show a literal universal flood? I must say no. Flood strata is found in Mesopotamia; therefore, the local flood theory comes to the surface again. Does this prove a Local Deluge of Noah. It might support this thesis; however, it is not very strong. Why? How do we know that this is the flood of Noah? The next question is: Is this a story that simply teaches truth from the Holy Spirit ,i.e., that God will punish evil. I believe that Eddie has a very strong argument in this case. I believe that JohnZ has a good point that this must be some type of history, but I do not in this time see that in geology. Is there anything that might prove JohnZ’s view of a literal flood that was universal? Yes. Sea creatures fossils have been found in mountainous regions. Does this prove that his theory is correct? Not totally. I must say that this is a question that cannot be totally answered. There must be more scientific evidence to support any thesis. I say this: If nothing else, the Holy Spirit is teaching that evil will be destroyed, and God is capable of this. As for the details of history, that must wait with more scientific study. I hope this arbitration will assist in your thoughts. God bless you friends. Eddie, please forward this to JohnZ. God bless. Eddie, I wish I were able to take a class of yours!
2 Likes
I appreciate your kind words friend. Have a nice Sunday. God bless.
The point of substituting the possible definitions in the text was to illustrate that with that simple substitution, a plain reading of the text clearly indicates a local flood. The land of which the narrator speaks is along the Euphrates river about 200 km southeast of Baghdad reference Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth | National Center for Science Education
True, you could go through a Greek translation and replace the word “soul” with “life” but you would need a reason to do so. If the book is describing an actual event, then you could draw from known information to make the determination of which word is more appropriate. When a text is ambiguous, meaning that no definitive determination can be made from the text alone, then it is perfectly acceptable to draw your reason for the substitution from known information not contained in the text itself. For instance, with your “soul” vs. “life” example, say that in this hypothetical Greek book you come upon the following disjointed sentence, “Bob took Fred’s soul”. If there is no other information about Bob or Fred in the book, but Bob and Fred are actual people, about which there is physical evidence or news reports or other evidence to be found, then you are perfectly within your rights to investigate outside sources to determine if your word substitution is appropriate. So, you go to the library totally prepared to find that Fred is a South American native who had his picture taken by Bob. But, low and behold, you find out that Fred was actually a Canadian real estate mogul, and that Bob was a crazed maniac who shot Fred in the face with a bazooka. You are now completely at liberty to change this instance of “soul” to “life” in this book, assuming that the book itself is about bazooka slayings and not vampires.
The historical events described in the Noah verses have left physical evidence that can be investigated to determine if the flood was local or global, and we can investigate that evidence to determine if the word “Eretz” should be translated as “land” or as “earth”. The physical evidence supports a local flood (see the link above) and therefore we can determine that the correct translation is “land”. We can do this without recourse to parsing Hebrew because we have the physical evidence.
There is no problem facing me in the form of a thematic tie-in between the Flood and Creation stories. The themes arise naturally from the subject matter. Similar subject matter, similar description, similar word usage. You says that it looks like the writer of Genesis had the whole world in mind but that it also looks as if there wasn’t a global flood at that time and that your solution for resolving this contradiction is that the story was not intended as history. Isn’t it simpler to say that even though it looks like the writer was referring to a global flood, we know that looks are deceiving in this case, based on the physical evidence?
1 Like
What caused the flood? Sin and rain. Here, read this. It’s excellent. Yes, Noah's Flood May Have Happened, But Not Over the Whole Earth | National Center for Science Education
I am glad that you passed the note to Patrick. In any case, we have tried.
Edward,
Thank you for you kind thoughts. I am quite content living my life in the manner that I do. No Gods, no Masters.