The Epic of Gilgamesh and the Bible

[spina1953]

As far as the flood story goes Genesis the ark could have been any size, but the thing the size as read in the story could not have held of of the animals on earth for one and secondly the flood could not have covered the whole of the earth since if it did how could any breathing person and animal live since they would have to have been higher then the highest mountain which would be about 29,000feet where there is not enough air for life.

I don’t doubt that there once was a major flood but not one that covered the whole of the planet, The world as the ancients knew it was only what was known to them which was the surrounding area in which they lived. The story goes into pre written history and passed on in various ways to make a point of the evil that man was doing and that God seeing it decided to end it except for Noah and family who were righteous in God’s eyes.

 

[Carmel]

how could any breathing person and animal live since they would have to have been higher then the highest mountain which would be about 29,000feet where there is not enough air for lif

Atmospheric air pressure is relative to sea level. So , as rising sea levels pushed the air column higher, the air pressure at sea level would stay the same. answersingenesis.org

 

[spina1953]

Hi Carmel, For me I do not believe the flood story in Gen. covered the whole of the planet. I do believe there was a great flood in the Middle East at some point in time that was remembered and passed on from generation to the next orally before it was ever written down. besides the Ark was not big enough to house every living creature two by two. On top of that there are two Biblical accounts of the flood story In one its two of every kind and in the other 1 pair of unclean animals and 7 pairs of clean animals of clean birds 7 pairs of clean birds and 1 pair of unclean birds.needs to stop and think of how many animals there were as it does not say but reason suggests millions. So i doubt that anyone could have built an Ark big enough to hold the animals one can think of.

 

[Carmel]

According to my understanding the Ark was very big and on three levels. All th species would have ben represented by one pair, eg. two dogs to represent the five million breeds which currently exist. Likewise for other species including bird species . For example, all the different types of crow which currently exist would have been represented by two crows.

 

[spina1953]

Hi Carmel, I can understand what you said about representing of 2 by 2 pairs of animals but what about the the chapter about 7 pairs etc.? Also if the flood covered the whole of the planet what about all of the plants and vegetation as all of them would have died and nothing remaining when the Ark came to rest so how would the animals that eat plants live?

The thing is one needs to understand the story from how those that lived at that time did which to them the whole world is just where they lived and the surrounding areas that they knew about. Remember this is a story from the Middle East area so they would not have known any other places like the American continents etc. Even with a pair representing all of its species there still would have been millions of different species and taking the flood story in a literal sense takes aways from the meaning of what the Biblical author is saying and meaning.

 

[Carmel]

I don’t have all the answers, but if the flood was only local, there would be no need to build an ark as the people could have fled to a safer region.
Jesus believed the Flood killed every person not on the Ark - Matt.24: 37-39 " As it was in the days of Noah, even so will be the coming of the Son of Man.For as in the days before the flood, they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage until the day when Noah entered the ark, and they did not understand until the flood came and swept them all away; even so will be the coming of the Son of Man.
Again in 2Peter 3 the coming judgement by fire is likened to the former judgement by water in Noah’s flood. A partial judgement in Noah’s day, therefore would mean a partial judgement to come.
Regarding food for the animals, its also likely that God had given instructions to Noah to carry extra provision of food to feed them until the plants on the earth recovered from the flood

 

[spina1953]

Hi Carmel, I think you are taking the story to be a literal story that the flood was the whole of the world and while i to do not have all the answers and never thought i did, it does stand to reason even a local flood if its a major one so big that people talked about it for thousands of years if not for centuries. Over time do you not think the story got embellished to push home a point the author wanted his audience to understand? I have read Matthew 24:37-39 what was Jesus trying to say in that passage you quoted from? It seems to me what jesus is saying is just as when the flood happened so to when Christ returns many people will be eating drinking and doing all sorts of things contrary to what God willed, while those who do will be saved just as Noah and family were saved.

I understand God can do anything and nothing is impossible to God.I get that. But how does this connect with gen. where God told Adam and Eve He was going to send a savior at some point in time had Noah not done what God asked of him there would not be any people let alone animals and plants and that would mean what God created was evil and good. I can’t but that. This story is more an allegory a figurative story in a sort of pre historical narrative, which provides the theological connection between man’s sin and the natural catastrophe of the flood.

 

[Carmel]

Hello Spina, You mention various authors of the Bible. But the Holy Spirit is the author of the Bible.
Secondly, its difficult for a person with a secular mindset to try to explain what the Bible means or should mean , so it will accomodate Itself to their secular worldview. The Christian is using a lens (preconceived understanding ) to interpret the text in front of him.
The atheist is using a secular mindset lens to interpret the text.
Hence, two people reading the same chapter of the Bible can arrive at two completely different conclusions.
The secularist can contemplate the scripture before him and try to figure out how to make the Sacred text accomodate his secular worldview. Wheras the Bible believer can read the ame Scripture and say “Praise the Lord, for He is good.” The same EVIDENCE leading to TWO DIFFERENT CONCLUSIONS.
It comes down to what lens youn are using to read Scripture

 

[spina1953]

Hi Carmel, Yes, the Holy Spirit is the author of sacred Scripture. The Holy Spirit inspired the various authors in what had been written. However none of Biblical authors ever thought that what they wrote was sacred Scripture but were orally and eventually written for the various communities. its true anyone can read Scripture and decide for themselves what it says and means, but this leads to chaos and confusion misunderstandings and distortions… There is nothing wrong in reading Scripture and everyone should read Scripture, but also one needs to understand that private and personal interpretations lead to conclusions the Biblical author never intended and the deeper meanings of God’s Word is completely missed for the meaning one wants Scripture to mean and say… For catholic’s we have the Magisterium to help one in understanding what Scripture says and means. By this means one can come to a better understanding God’s Word.

One can readily see from so many Christian denomanations there are various interpretations different from what another Church says Scripture says and means. When the reformations started, the Catholic Church was no longer the authority they would listen to and so needing a new authority the Bible became that authority in which every man can interpret Scripture according to his understanding.

The Catholic Church under the guidance of the Holy Spirit to decide which books and writings were sacred Scripture and which one’s were not that became the Bible a collection of Scared writings. So the Catholic Church has the authority to say what Scripture says and means.

 

[Carmel]

That shouldn’t be a problem for faithful Catholics, as Scripture itself tells us that Scripture isn’t open to private interpretations. So, there is the Magesterium of the Catholic Church to guide us through any complex passages. When the Bible was finally decided ( which books to include, which to set aside ) under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, there was just One Church - not 20000 or 30000 churches as there are today

 

[spina1953]

Hi Carmel, This true what you say! Scripture itself was never open to private interpretations. As a matter of face the Catholic Church is often silent on many passages in Scripture till a variety of interpretations contrary to what it might mean and then only under the guidance of the Holy Spirit does the Catholic Church respond which may take several centuries before the Church speaks on it. Scripture doe not interpret itself nor does it claim to to be the last Word since St. John himself said that not everything jesus said and did was written down but only that which one might come to believe.

The NT authors never once thought that what they wrote was sacred Scripture and would have been amazed to be told that what they wrote was sacred Scripture and they never once ever thought that it was the final authority. Jesus Himself never wrote anything and only a few of the Apostles wrote. Jesus did no tell them to intrust His message in a dead book which might perish and be destroyed and be misunderstood and misinterpreted . So the catholic Church existed before the Bible. but when the time came it was to the catholic Church to decide with the guidance of the Holy Spirit what was sacred Scripture and what was not…

You are correct Carmel that when the Bible was compiled there was only the Catholic Church not thousands upon thousands of churches as they are today. The OT authors also never thought that what they wrote or was written from their oral telling that what they spoke was sacred Scripture although what they had to say was indeed inspired by the guidance of the Holy Spirit. I think one thing to remember is that The Old testament means old Covenant an New Testament means New Covenant which is what we follow as Catholic’s under her guidance.