Here's an interesting story:
http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/04/26/noah.ark.ap/index.html
To me it seems that the Noah account is technically impossible- genetic diversity in humans and animals, and technology considerations with making the boat- and that at best, it's a highly twisted story about 'something else'. I wonder, if they do find a boat will they proclaim that it automatically makes the story of Noah true, and whether this will rub up Creationists even more?
| ? posted by Leperous |
|
To me it seems that the Noah account is technically impossible- genetic diversity ... |
never stopped the "Adam and Eve" believers 
I think a christian/whoever would say God helped Noah so it doesn't matter if it's technically impossible, but then of course you ask why he'd do that when there are other, non-nature-breaking ways to mercilessly kill sinners (which doesn't seem to happen these days... hmm, wonder what those drowned people would have to say about free will!). Though I guess according to Judges 1:19, where he has trouble killing people with iron chariots, he's not actually that omnipotent and couldn't just strike them down | ? posted by Leperous |
|
Here's an interesting story: http://www.cnn.com/2004/TECH/science/04/26/noah.ark.ap/index.html To me it seems that the Noah account is technically impossible- genetic diversity in humans and animals, and technology considerations with making the boat- and that at best, it's a highly twisted story about 'something else'. I wonder, if they do find a boat will they proclaim that it automatically makes the story of Noah true, and whether this will rub up Creationists even more? |
I think anybody who doesn't see it was based off the Epic of Gilgamesh is already a little too deep-set into their beliefs to be convinced otherwise.
| ? posted by scary_jeff |
| A christian would say the story was a metaphor for what happened, that the story was told in that way because it's the only way the people of the time would have understood. That way you can still believe the story, in a way, whilst maintaining imunity from arguements. |
But, a) what clues are there in the story to suggest that it's an interpretation- it gives actual precise values for the dimension of the ship, it seems to be presenting itself as a real event!- and b) how do they choose which OT stories to take as literal truth and which to not? Why is the OT such a mixture of truth and metaphor/fable?
I watched the noah's program, it wasnt too bad. I also watched a thing on erm exodus? I dunno it was one of the last bible things & they basically proved all it was - like most of the bible was that its just an attack on the romans. lol
[addsig]
Eh, people risk personal harm to themselves and their compatriots by climbing mountains for far lesser reasons.
The theory I heard on the explanation of Noah's Flood was that it wasn't worldwide, just localish. An area the size of Britain could get flooded, make the people inside of it think it's worldwide, since they don't know any better, and provided it's attached to a lot of other land, no real need to go about rescuing animals to protect species. Still unlikely, but manageable.
Regarding the Gilgamesh theory, I think it's fair to say a majority of people aren't familiar with the story. Disney hasn't made the Gilgamesh movie, and frankly, would any of us know the tale of Snow White or Cinderella if it wasn't for them?
Just suppose....that they find the ark.
And suppose...that inside, perfectly preserved, is an olive branch. The olive branch would be sitting on a wooden pedastel, and a ray of sunlight is beaming on the branch.
And suppose, that when (the person who discovers it) sees it, a voice can be heard saying, "Remove thy shoes, for where thou stand is Holy Ground."
And the multitudes would flock to the Mountain....there would be great changes in the world...Religion would be back again, and the doubt of a true-one God would end.
Just suppose...
pfft. Anyways, many of the events in the old testament of the bible are based on historical events that were obviously distorted by the people not knowing any better. For example, there is evidence that the Noah's Ark story is an explanation of the expansion of the Black Sea. The Black Sea was initially a lake that was below sea level which was flooded when a natural dam at the Straights of Dardenelles broke, releasing the Mediterranian into the Black Sea.
I read it in a National Geographic somewhere, so it must be true!
| ? posted by DocRock |
|
Just suppose....that they find the ark. And suppose...that inside, perfectly preserved, is an olive branch. The olive branch would be sitting on a wooden pedastel, and a ray of sunlight is beaming on the branch. And suppose, that when (the person who discovers it) sees it, a voice can be heard saying, "Remove thy shoes, for where thou stand is Holy Ground." And the multitudes would flock to the Mountain....there would be great changes in the world...Religion would be back again, and the doubt of a true-one God would end. Just suppose... |
I wouldn't enjoy a world where everybody agrees with each other.
TBH science could be a much more productive force for good if it didnt insist on entrenching itself in a war on shattering peoples faith...
[addsig]
[addsig]Aye, but I think you cross the line when you set out to find scientific evidence or theory to prove religion wrong... not that im saying this Ark thing is one of those, but it's still impeaching on peoples beliefs..
likewise religion shouldnt be forced upon people etc..
[addsig]
