Is the story of Noah's flood fact or fiction?

[gabby989062]

It's my homework assignment to get two different opinions on Noah's flood:

A Christian version

and

A non-Christian version

Does anyone have an opinion? And please state which one.

 

[Pseudo Statistic]

Non-Christian version: Muslim version: It's a fact.

 

[Janitor]

You might note in your assignment paper that the very tip of Mount Everest is limestone. That is a rock which forms over a long period of time--not just 40 days--under water. The non-biblical (and non-Muslim) explanation would be that the rock there was formed in shallow seawater many millions of years ago, and that the northward movement of the Indian plate has caused an ongoing squeezing together of India and China that has led to that particular rock stratum being 29,000 feet above sea level.

 

[russ_watters]

I'm a Christian, but I don't take the Great Flood literally. It may simply be that there was a big flood in the Middle East and at the time, the author of Exodus (?) thought that that was the entire world. Why don't I think it can be taken literally?: That's a lot of water (not hard to calculate how much) - where did it come from?

 

[misskitty]

Christian-its fact...the story of the flood wasn't in Exodus it was in Genesis 6:1-9:29. Remember in the story that it Rained for 40 days and 40 nights. Your right, that is a lot of rain.

 

[polyb]

What kind of assignment is this?

So here is a non-faith-based opinion: It's a story that may be loosely based upon a set of events that may or may not have happened. The story serves more to instruct and affirm a belief system. Regardless of what events that may or may not have happened, its function is much more useful as instruction to the specific faith it serves. That is how these things work. Factuality is irrelevant. As stated in other posts, there are some accounting problems that have to be amended in order for the story to be true. But then again if one is to use the bible a literal source of information, then Pi is equal to 3.

As to the origins of the story, some have speculated that Gilgamesh, a Babylonian story, is the source of the Noah flood myth. This seems to be possible considering the ties between the middle-east and Babylon. Along with goods and services, stories amongst other things, have a tendency of being exchanged as well. There has been a few shows on the discovery channel about this topic and the one that I think best corroborates the Gilgamesh/Noah story is the possibility that the Black Sea at one time, about 7000 years ago, was cut off from the Mediterranean. Here is a link to the National Geographic write up on this interesting theory:

http://www.nationalgeographic.com/blacksea/ax/frame.html

As it states in the beginning of that page, most cultures have legends of a flood and this has many investigators speculating that it may be the result of the glacial meltdown from the last ice age. If one is to take a factual account of things, I find this proposition more realistic than the ones being purported by those who are looking to either promote or affirm their own beliefs and faith.

 

[misskitty]

I have seen those shows. Its a vaild opinion of what happened and its great that people feel the need to explore this. I wasn't using the Bible as a source of literal information. Simply restating what is said in that particular story. As well as commenting on the book it came from. I do agree that the theories developed are interesting. Its not surprising that stories travel with goods and services then. It was a source of information. People still do that today. Except instead of taking it to be an exact account we just go watch the news.

 

[polyb]

I have seen those shows. Its a vaild opinion of what happened and its great that people feel the need to explore this. I wasn't using the Bible as a source of literal information. Simply restating what is said in that particular story. As well as commenting on the book it came from. I do agree that the theories developed are interesting. Its not surprising that stories travel with goods and services then. It was a source of information. People still do that today. Except instead of taking it to be an exact account we just go watch the news.

What was it that Mark Twain said:

"Those who do not read the newspaper are uninformed, those that do read it are misinformed"

We could say the same is true of watching the news nowadays!

I am not trying to hark on people's faith, that is not really my intent. The Noah story is really a device to affirm one's faith in God, Javeh(?), or Allah, depending on your faith. As to it's factual basis, that does not have the same value as it does as vehicle to affirm faith. That is just my humble opinion. I hope I didnt kick off a religious discussion that will end up in a locked thread.

 

[gabby989062]

thanks

thank you all for responding and thank you for your link, polyb, that's what i need for my report.

 

[gabby989062]

let me explain what i have to do in a more detailed manner:

I have to read 100 pgs for a nonchristian version and 100 pgs for a christian version. Since i cannot find any books I am askiing you so you can be my sources or references.

 

[Curious3141]

I certainly hope this is a Sunday school assignment, because honestly, in any other class, your teacher has no business setting Bible reading for students as homework. The same goes for the Koran, Torah and the Bhagavad-Gita. Strict no-nos in a secular classroom.

 

[gabby989062]

maybe the great amount of waters came from god.. you wuold have beleived that if you were a christian

 

[gabby989062]

actually i go to a Christian school and i regularly have these type of assignments

 

[misskitty]

I'm glad that we could all help you.

 

[BobG]

I certainly hope this is a Sunday school assignment, because honestly, in any other class, your teacher has no business setting Bible reading for students as homework. The same goes for the Koran, Torah and the Bhagavad-Gita. Strict no-nos in a secular classroom.

Wow, so much for Old World Lit in public schools. For examples of very old literature, just what is one supposed to read if not old religous works.

 

[Curious3141]

Wow, so much for Old World Lit in public schools. For examples of very old literature, just what is one supposed to read if not old religous works.

I dunno...Greek mythology ? Much less chance of offense if it isn't a current (and contentious) religion.

At any rate, especially in a school, some literature has to be "off limits" for pragmatic purposes. I'm pretty sure that a teacher telling students to read Mein Kampf *purely for historical significance* or the Marquis de Sade *purely for biographical insight* still won't go down too well with most parents. Heck, some parents are trying to ban Harry Potter (which I don't agree with, BTW).

But since there's already an "unwritten" rule that some lit is not appropriate in a school, I think it stands to reason to include that restriction to works of faith. Surely you know of the contention that surrounds these things, with many people clamouring for the abolition of evolutionary teaching in favor of creationist tripe, etc. etc. ? I just think it makes good sense to steer clear of unnecessary controversy.

As an atheist, if I sent my son to a secular school and his Christian teacher asked him to study the Bible, I would be miffed. I'm not saying that I actually would mind my son reading the Bible, I just don't think school is an appropriate place to learn mythology. I might well let him read the Bible at home (after instructing him on the historical and cultural context), along with the other major religious texts and ancient mythology, but it would be on my terms and on our personal time.

Of course, if it's a Christian school, I see no problem with this sort of thing, since the parents and children should know exactly what they're getting into.

 

[Jameson]

I would just like to know, who here can rationally justify Noah's flood? The whole story. Everything from two of every animal to the whole world being covered in rain. I would like to know your thoughts, as I do not see a way to explain the complete story logically and scientifically.

Jameson

 

[BobG]

I dunno...Greek mythology ? Much less chance of offense if it isn't a current (and contentious) religion.

At any rate, especially in a school, some literature has to be "off limits" for pragmatic purposes. I'm pretty sure that a teacher telling students to read Mein Kampf *purely for historical significance* or the Marquis de Sade *purely for biographical insight* still won't go down too well with most parents. Heck, some parents are trying to ban Harry Potter (which I don't agree with, BTW).

But since there's already an "unwritten" rule that some lit is not appropriate in a school, I think it stands to reason to include that restriction to works of faith. Surely you know of the contention that surrounds these things, with many people clamouring for the abolition of evolutionary teaching in favor of creationist tripe, etc. etc. ? I just think it makes good sense to steer clear of unnecessary controversy.

As an atheist, if I sent my son to a secular school and his Christian teacher asked him to study the Bible, I would be miffed. I'm not saying that I actually would mind my son reading the Bible, I just don't think school is an appropriate place to learn mythology. I might well let him read the Bible at home (after instructing him on the historical and cultural context), along with the other major religious texts and ancient mythology, but it would be on my terms and on our personal time.

Of course, if it's a Christian school, I see no problem with this sort of thing, since the parents and children should know exactly what they're getting into.

I think what you say is true in in practice. But, I also think the over-concern on 'political correctness' is one of the problems with today's schools. On the one hand, schools will be criticized if they don't teach diversity. On the other, they'll be even more severely criticized if they do teach diversity.

A couple of your comments illustrate the conflict. Virtually no one would be offended by teaching Greek mythology. Yet, you would be offended by an assignment involving the Bible, because you feel school's not an appropriate place to learn mythology.

The real problem lies in teaching a subject where the opinion over whether it's fact or mythology isn't unanimous. Even when I was in high school, a teacher would not have been able to assign anything from the Bible as homework. If the assignment treated the Bible as a literary work similar to Greek mythology, one side would have lynched the teacher. If the assignment treated the Bible as a religous work, the other side would have lynched the teacher.

The only reason other religous works could be used is because virtually everyone in our school was Christian or Jewish. No one was offended by treating something like the Bhagavad Gita as literature.

 

[Curious3141]

I think what you say is true in in practice. But, I also think the over-concern on 'political correctness' is one of the problems with today's schools. On the one hand, schools will be criticized if they don't teach diversity. On the other, they'll be even more severely criticized if they do teach diversity.

A couple of your comments illustrate the conflict. Virtually no one would be offended by teaching Greek mythology. Yet, you would be offended by an assignment involving the Bible, because you feel school's not an appropriate place to learn mythology.

The real problem lies in teaching a subject where the opinion over whether it's fact or mythology isn't unanimous. Even when I was in high school, a teacher would not have been able to assign anything from the Bible as homework. If the assignment treated the Bible as a literary work similar to Greek mythology, one side would have lynched the teacher. If the assignment treated the Bible as a religous work, the other side would have lynched the teacher.

The only reason other religous works could be used is because virtually everyone in our school was Christian or Jewish. No one was offended by treating something like the Bhagavad Gita as literature.

I read you loud and clear about the political correctness angle (and agree with you) but I think it's wrong to teach Hinduism or Buddhism in school as well. It would be hypocritical to exclude Xianity/Judaism/Islam and allow other current religions air time in a secular classroom. I prefer to sidestep the whole issue : no religion, unless it's a class specifically advertised as dealing with it, in which case it's fine.

 

[misskitty]

There is no real way to justify the ENTIRE flood. Most of it is just a leap of faith. Thats why they call it Faith. People are in the process of trying to prove the flood was a real honest to goodness historical event. Look at all the time people are spending on Mount Ararat in Turkey. Many people believe that's where the remains of the ark are located.

As far as banning books and such, I don't agree with the banning of any kind of piece of literature. Its call the FIRST AMENDMENT. People who have issues with other people expressing their views in literature should just not read the book. Not try to prevent others from reading it.

Its important to read as many different works as you can possibly get your hands on. Even if you don't agree with the opinion expressed, you should still read it so you can obtain an idea of that person/persons 's thought process at the time.

Although teachers have to be very careful with what they tell their students to read as an assignment, they shouldn't exclude influential works such as John Steinbeck's Of Mice and Men or anything by Hemingway or Twain. Most of the cases I have heard about banning these novels, have been based on the language content. If you don't like the language used and that's why you hate it then don't read it! One also needs to remember these novels were written in a different time, so then that language was acceptable to be used in any kind of work.

I completely agree with Curious, this banning books business is a waste of time. Also, if your going to send your student to a school that encourages such readings then know exactly what you are getting yourself and your child into.

 

[honestrosewater]

It's my homework assignment to get two different opinions on Noah's flood:

A Christian version

and

A non-Christian version

Does anyone have an opinion? And please state which one.

It may be too late, but I think the Flood Geology section on talkorigins is just what you're seeking. talkorigins may also prove helpful for a future assignment too- and you may just like it.

 

[misskitty]

Cool link honestrosewater. There's a lot of interesting and good information there.

 

[russ_watters]

I read you loud and clear about the political correctness angle (and agree with you) but I think it's wrong to teach Hinduism or Buddhism in school as well. It would be hypocritical to exclude Xianity/Judaism/Islam and allow other current religions air time in a secular classroom. I prefer to sidestep the whole issue : no religion, unless it's a class specifically advertised as dealing with it, in which case it's fine.

It really is all about tone. Of course a world history class has to teach about cultures of different people and that means teaching about religion. And teaching about religion is different than teaching religion ("these people believe..." instead of "you should believe..."). Same goes for literature: I read some of the Bible in an English class and that was a perfectly reasonable lesson.

 

[misskitty]

Russ, you're right. It is all in the tone of how one teaches the material. Unfortuantly, there are many people out there that don't follow such a curtousy (sp?). Some teachers walk a very fine line of what's unbiased and what's not. It makes the students in classes uneasy.

 

[Curious3141]

It really is all about tone. Of course a world history class has to teach about cultures of different people and that means teaching about religion. And teaching about religion is different than teaching religion ("these people believe..." instead of "you should believe..."). Same goes for literature: I read some of the Bible in an English class and that was a perfectly reasonable lesson.

I would agree with this as being a reasonable classroom practice, as long as other religions and the atheistic viewpoints are given equal time. Above all, the discussion should be expository, not exhortative.

 

[Grogs]

Russ, you're right. It is all in the tone of how one teaches the material. Unfortuantly, there are many people out there that don't follow such a curtousy (sp?). Some teachers walk a very fine line of what's unbiased and what's not. It makes the students in classes uneasy.

Almost everyone has a pre-formed belief with respect to religion. It takes a great deal of professionalism and discipline not to let that belief seep through into the discussion. Certainly more than we can reasonably expect a secondary teacher making $20K a year to possess.

And while I think it would be a wonderful idea for children to learn the basic tenets of all the major religions (maybe they could make their own decision about which one to follow ) I don't think it would ever fly. Some christian parents probably consider reading the Koran on par with reading the Necronomicon (and vice versa.) There would probably be too many cases of teachers being killed, schools being bombed, etc to make the idea worth the trouble.

 

[misskitty]

A very valid point Grogs. Unfortunatly you're right too. I agree with you that it would be great for kids to learn the basic tenets of other religions and make their own decisions. Its all too scary that with all the violence hardly makes it worth it...but should that stop us from trying? Just a thought.

 

[BobG]

Almost everyone has a pre-formed belief with respect to religion. It takes a great deal of professionalism and discipline not to let that belief seep through into the discussion. Certainly more than we can reasonably expect a secondary teacher making $20K a year to possess.

And while I think it would be a wonderful idea for children to learn the basic tenets of all the major religions (maybe they could make their own decision about which one to follow ) I don't think it would ever fly. Some christian parents probably consider reading the Koran on par with reading the Necronomicon (and vice versa.) There would probably be too many cases of teachers being killed, schools being bombed, etc to make the idea worth the trouble.

Your first paragraph is the reason our school stayed away from the Bible completely. It just would have been difficult to avoid controversy.

Using religous works none of the students or parents were probably familiar with and that none of the teachers were likely to have any strong feelings about did two things:

1) If you're studying old world literature, there just isn't much material out there if you exclude religious works.

2) It did expose students to alternative cultures and alternative points of view. Even treating the works in a literary, more neutral manner, none of the students were so dense that they didn't realize that there were people who believed in this work as a religion the same as they were taught to believe in the Bible (in fact, you had to have had done well in your past Lit classes to take the class in the first place). I'm surprised it didn't raise more concern among religous parents. It was hard to look at other religious works without wondering what made the stories in the Bible any more valid than this other stuff they were reading.

BTW- only allowing above average students to take the class had more to do with the difficulting of researching your term paper. Most religious books just don't seem to be organized very well if you only want information about a specific topic. You would think someone would add an index at the end.

 

[misskitty]

It only seems logical after so many copyrightings that someone might add an index. I've only found a handful of religious references (christian and non-christian) that actually have them.

 

[gabby989062]

thanks for the links and no it isn't too late. My project is due tomorow, so i can still collect info until 11 pm tonight. Thanks to everyone and enjoy you discussion.

 

[gabby989062]

im done with my non christian part, know i need a few more references for christain. I could use a book online, or a site, which i am haveing trouble finding. so if anyone has a suggestion please reply.

 

[honestrosewater]

im done with my non christian part, know i need a few more references for christain. I could use a book online, or a site, which i am haveing trouble finding. so if anyone has a suggestion please reply.

http://www.sixdaycreation.com/facts/flood/index.html
http://www.answersincreation.org/flood.htm
http://www.religioustolerance.org/ev_noah.htm
http://www.christiananswers.net/creation/menu-catastrophe.html
I didn't read all of those- just perused them; I think they're pretty safe bets though. If you want more, you should try goolging combinations of "noah's flood" or "flood" and "creation" or "creationist" or "creationism" etc.

 

[Janitor]

I have not read honestrosewater's links. I wonder if any of them explain how Noah was able to find Australia in his ark before the flooding started, in order to gather up samples of marsupials and other creatures indigenous to that continent.

I can't remember if the Bible has Noah collecting samples of terrestrial plants. Wouldn't weeks in deep seawater put at least some plant species at risk of extinction?

 

[misskitty]

It probably would put some of the species at risk of dying off.

 

[honestrosewater]

I have not read honestrosewater's links. I wonder if any of them explain how Noah was able to find Australia in his ark before the flooding started, in order to gather up samples of marsupials and other creatures indigenous to that continent.

I can't remember if the Bible has Noah collecting samples of terrestrial plants. Wouldn't weeks in deep seawater put at least some plant species at risk of extinction?

What, you guys can't read? The last link is an FAQ- I found the answers in a minute. The link says the Bible says the animals came to Noah- Noah didn't have to go round them up. And it says something about the seeds being able to survive- the adult plants didn't have to.
The believers really have an advantage (or an out, depending on how you look at it)- if an omnipotent being wants something done, what's to stop it? There isn't much point in saying such and such couldn't have happened when there's such a being involved. I think you really have to start from the same assumptions in order to resolve the question of whether the flood was possible.

 

[Janitor]

... if an omnipotent being wants something done, what's to stop it? ...

True, He could have floated a pair of kangaroos across the ocean to Palestine. Or He could have airmailed them. But those who believe in a truly omnipotent deity have to wonder how He could have goofed up badly enough with His creation (which He originally labeled "good") that He felt it necessary to kill 99.99999999 percent of it by flooding.

 

[honestrosewater]

True, He could have floated a pair of kangaroos across the ocean to Palestine. Or He could have airmailed them. But those who believe in a truly omnipotent deity have to wonder how He could have goofed up badly enough with His creation (which He originally labeled "good") that He felt it necessary to kill 99.99999999 percent of it by flooding.

Well, don't shoot the messenger, but some say it's because people were given free will. That is, people are to blame for all the bad in the world. I know, what about natural disasters and such- well, some say that bad things are justified by allowing for even better good things. For example, if there were no poverty, there couldn't be charity- so poverty (bad) is justified by making charity (good) possible.

 

[TsunamiJoe]

hm also just for additional information, it was 7 of both male and female of every species

also i was watching a program once, and it had mentioned something about the plates having slid together which caused a dramatic burst in the cracks that leaked a lot of the underground water, which could account for long periods of rain. also keep in mind that even today in some deserts it won't rain for years, but every now and then it will rain for weeks on end

 

[misskitty]

What program was that? Sounds really interesting. This has become quite the long running thread.

I wonder...If that ark had to fit that many animals and it was the size of a modern day cruise ship made out of wood...Where did Noah get all the wood? He lived in the desert didn't he? Trees don't really grow in the deserts of the Middle East.

 

[dextercioby]

What's this thread still doing in the HM section ? : I think it's worthy of Ivan's forum...

Daniel.

 

[Grogs]

hm also just for additional information, it was 7 of both male and female of every species

Not entirely true. It initially states 2 of every animal. A few verses later, it states '7 of every clean animal, 2 of every unclean animal, and 7 of every bird.' The extra clean animals and birds were apparently used (in part) as sacrifices after the flood was over.

BTW, I personally tend to favor the localized flooding of the Black Sea region theory. I could very easily see how a person who lived through that may very well have thought the entire world was flooded.

 

[misskitty]

I still want to know where all that wood came from.

 

[TsunamiJoe]

well you also need to think of the fact that the middle east was more likely an oasis back then, after all many think that's where a high majority of dinosaurs had lived - so it wasnt the desertous place we know today

and grog, considering that was found from a past pastor of mine from when I was lutheran, I'm going to believe someone whos had proper schooling on the matter.

 

[airkapp]

hmm Genesis 1-11 should be taken as mythology. They can be compared to various Babylonian myths (or otherwise pagan myths). I'm a Christian and I see this as metaphorical affirmation of Jehovah and how he related to a certain group of people in a certain time period. For a more scientific explanation, see the ice age floods. A great disasterous flood that could account for the mythologies presented. This doens't mean we could necessarily discount the reading. It presents anthropological account of who these ancient cultures were and how they related to there society. Keep account various idioms, cultural expressions, connotations, is very important in reading any ancient text. Noah's flood, if taken literally presents a wide variety of scientific and logical problems. Basic ones such as, how could all the different species (even two of every kind) be placed in one boat. It would take a boat the size of South America for such. Secondly, assuming the animals were taken on the boat and kept alive, it would be nonsenical and incredulous to believe that all the animals could be kept from ripping each other apart. The fesces and waste product would of created unlivable sanitary conditions that would of easily killed them off in less then 40 days. Problems as such can stem back to Adam stories if taken literally. There is no logical explanation as to how a dinosaur and primitive man can survive at one time. Dating methods (radioactive decay) etc, effectively disprove any flood that could of occurred 10,000 or so years ago. Creationists often attack the methods but if you search out www.talkorigins.com you will effectively see that every creationist myth propogated has been utterly refuted with nothing left to stand on. There may be no such thing as proof in regards to Science, but this is about as close to convincing evidence as you'll get.

good luck on your paper

 

[TsunamiJoe]

i didnt claim they did live at the same time, just the same region, and personaly i find the radiocative dating to have many possible flaws, such as if an object were to come across any sort of radiation it can alter the readouts by thousands upon thousands of years

but aside from that, I do in general agree with your statement, that a lot of the occurances in the bible, are not persay reality, but a way of telling a story to teach some sort of moral