Was The story of Noah real?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Catholic_Teen9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Yes, it happened as described, except English Bibles mistranslated it to read as a global flood. We Jews believe it was local.
 
Rabbi said:
Yes, it happened as described, except English Bibles mistranslated it to read as a global flood. We Jews believe it was local.
Click to expand...
Gee, it would have been a lot easier to just move instead of spending 100 years to build an ark.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.)
 
niceatheist said:
I can’t think of any geology article or text I’ve read in my entire life that even gives the Flood a mention. It’s simply not a legitimate topic in science. But try here for some research into why a global flood never happened.
Click to expand...
What is the rock type that nearly all fossils are found?
 
Rabbi said:
Yes, it happened as described, except English Bibles mistranslated it to read as a global flood. We Jews believe it was local.
Click to expand...
Why would God use a local flood to wipe out all but 8 people if he were disappointed in humanity as a whole?
 
buffalo said:
Source? Not everyone agrees with this claim.
Click to expand...
niceatheist’s link is far and away the best one, but if you would like another you can check out the Rational Wiki link.

Here’s a quick summary of some of the points they make:
  1. The flood would require three times the amount of water that currently exists on Earth.
  2. The amount of precipitation that would be required would drown people and animals simply by the act of breathing.
  3. That much water in the atmosphere would turn the Earth into a giant pressure cooker.
  4. The idea of an ice canopy (one proposed answer to where the water came from) has its own set of problems.
  5. Saying the water came from comets isn’t how the flood is described in the Bible.
  6. Water coming from rocks below would come out as steam, which would sterilize the planet.
  7. The big question is where did the water go. Some go so far as to say that it shot out from the atmosphere onto the moon, which is ridiculous.
  8. The Ark story is contradictory in how many of each animal made it.
  9. Gathering these animals is a logistical impossibility.
  10. There’s nothing on the Ark to protect aquatic animals and the mixture of salt and fresh water would have killed most of the ones not on the Ark.
  11. It’s possible that waves of a global flood could have reached miles in height, something no wooden craft could survive.
  12. For those who claim that there was a global flood in the 3rd millennium BC has to ignore all the events and civilizations that existed during that time.
  13. There are fragile geological formations that would not have survived a flood.
  14. Fossil layers don’t show a mass extinction event.
  15. Animals could not have survived post-flood with all plant life destroyed by the flood.
  16. Post-flood the carnivores would have no food sources. Two or seven of each “kind” would not be sufficient even in the short term, and would wipe out whole species.
  17. Post-flood animals would not eat year-old drowned corpses.
  18. Some animals require certain environments to breed, and they would have been destroyed in the flood.
  19. Plant life can survive a flood, but most can’t survive being without sun for a year.
  20. Even if seeds survived, the conditions would be terrible to grow in.
  21. There weren’t enough of each person or animal to repopulate the Earth.
  22. There wouldn’t have been enough population to build the Tower of Babel a century later.
  23. A genetic bottleneck is far more likely with such a small starting populations, greatly increasing the chance of genetic defects.
  24. Why would God need a flood if he’s all powerful? (i.e. Is God less efficient than Thanos?)
  25. There’s no mention of saving microorganisms, many of which are needed for life.
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
The flood would require three times the amount of water that currently exists on Earth.
Click to expand...
We now know there is way much more water locked in the rocks and underground oceans.

If the earth was complete level we would be under several thousand feet of water right now.
 
Last edited:
Mike_from_NJ said:
Fossil layers don’t show a mass extinction event.
Click to expand...
Yes, they do. All kinds of creatures buried together in fossil graveyards.

Actually, this is one of the worst lists I have ever seen. The talkorigins one is much better. Even there, there is more than their way of interpreting the evidence.
 
Last edited:
@Mike_from_NJ and @buffalo

Yes, G-d wanted to repopulate the area, but think of the logic here: why did G-d tell Noah to build the ark when he could have easily moved? Well, why did they have to walk around Jericho for 7 days, or why did Moses set the system were one could only be healed by a snake bite was by locking eyes with a bronze serpent (Numbers 21:8-9)? The point with Noah is that is was a test of faith. HaShem is always delaying action, look what He did with Sodom and Nineveh? Bereshis Rabbah has some great commentary on that one, it says Noah planted and cut cedar trees for a hundred and twenty years (turtles live that long, why couldn’t humans at one point? I know it goes against what the Ralbag says, haha). So think of it like this: had Noah leave when the Mabul (flood) came, and never offered a word to anyone, not a warning, and without any visual representation via the ark, the people would have had no chance to do tusheva (repentance) and THAT Would be unfair. Now, why did the animals go into the ark, you say? Good question! Noah and his family weren’t… ornithologists, they didn’t know a thing about the trajectory of birds, nor that perhaps many species of the localize area didn’t migrate out of their natural habitats. For example, the Hummingbird can only fly, say, about twenty minutes before dropping. Now you’re telling me it’s going to have to do that through a storm, for 40 days and 40 nights? Moreover, had Noah intend to bring EVERY animal in existence due to a soon global flood, that would have taken…f…o…r…e…v…e…r…

Plus, he’d never be able to recreate the fauna which once existed… on a global scale! HaShem’s problem was not with the animals, it was with the people, but since these innocent beasts were in harm’s way, something had to be done.

There is evidence of a local flood in Josephus, see Antiquities of the Jews, Book 1, Chapter 3, Section 6. There, he talks about the Greco-Jewish tradition of other survivors of the flood besides that of Noah and his family.

Also see Bereshis Rabbah 23. It says that “The deluge in the time of Noah was by no means the only flood with which this earth was visited. The first flood did its work of destruction as far as Jaffé, and the one of Noah’s days extended to Barbary.”

Then we have Bereshis Rabbah 32:11 talking about the mountains of Mesopotamia being covered. And Zevachim 113a, B.T., suggests that Israel was safe from the flood. Well, how did that happen, lest for a local flood, or an invisible wall? Well, the latter explanation just sounds stupid.
 
Last edited:
@buffalo, @Mike_from_NJ

Rabbinic tradition, as well as Josephus, point to a local flood. Of course, a global flood couldn’t happen either, such a thing would be impossible. When the Torah uses the word “Eretz,” the term means “land.” Sometimes it means world, but this is used sparingly. The Hebrew for the whole world is “tebel,” but, as it turns out, that word isn’t found in the story of Noah’s flood. The point being that these people didn’t populate the whole earth at that time, and if they did, as evolution suggests (which we Jews have never rejected by the way), then He was only mad at a certain “group” of people. Nonetheless, Rambam says G-d doesn’t have feelings, and can’t get “mad,” therefore, there is no explanation for the flood after all. It merely happened because it did.

Lastly, Psalm 104 contradicts a global flood.
 
I imagine this is a vague reference to sedimentary rock.

Read the links. A global flood never happened.
 
Rabbi said:
Nonetheless, Rambam says G-d doesn’t have feelings, and can’t get “mad,” therefore, there is no explanation for the flood after all. It merely happened because it did.
Click to expand...
Maybe He does not get mad (like we do) but He sure knows when He wants attention to Him, He will get it, don’t you think?
Is it also Jewish tradition and belief that the rainbow represents God’s promise that another flood will not happen? I read this on a local Christian site.
In light of what you said then maybe the rainbow is a symbol for Jews and Middle Easterners that another scary sign He will not bring. Could it be so?
 
Kinda. Rambam says the rainbow really meant nothing. Others, that it is a sin to look at, or at least disregarded as bad.

According to the rationalists, G-d shows mercy via the order in nature and the giving of the Torah. When He’s mad, it’s shown through creation, as when someone wrongs you.
 
Some don’t, mine is sort of a daas yachid in the Orthodox community, but it’s based off biblical and non-biblical sources.
 
Mike_from_NJ said:
Why would God need a flood if he’s all powerful? (i.e. Is God less efficient than Thanos?)
Click to expand...
This just doesn’t belong like the others. God could just have chosen to do it that way.
 
Last edited:
It does not need to be literally true. There is no dogma on the rainbow. Don’t tether your faith to the ark, because it may not literally have existed. The inspired author was not a witness and, although Noah might be based on a real person, and the flood might be based on a real event, it’s a tale from the deep past with mythic overtones.

Troy was a real city and there was a real battle for it, but Homer’s Iliad probably isn’t literally true, although maybe there were people Helen and Hector were based on. Of course, Homer is not inspired by God to teach salvation history; but not all myth is a “lie” so much as an embellishment.

I understand the resistance of Christians to see anything in the Bible as mythic as if they’re conceding ground to skepticism; but this is not a new debate, it’s an ancient one, and the faith was never based on a literal reading of Genesis.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top