3
   

The Biblical Flood and its Nature

 
 
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 09:55 pm
The Old Testament of the Bible is laconic and appears in many places to be telling large stories in too few words. It was originally meant as a kind of a Reader's Digest version of what Jews call "midrashim", meaning the full body of very ancient rabbinical literature. Jews simply have more writing from further back than anybody else does.

Louis Ginzberg's "Legends" appears to be the largest body of such literature ever translated into western languages. It used to be a difficult thing to find but now is freely available on the net. In book form it consists of seven volumes, altogether a bit more than a foot thick. Some of it is clearly fanciful while aspects of it provide a much better flavor for details of the times they describe than we might have had:

Legends of the Jews, Louis Ginzberg:

http://philologos.org/__eb-lotj/

These texts flesh out some of the tales you read in the Bible, e.g.

Noah trying to save dinosaurs:

Quote:

One animal, the reem, Noah could not take into the ark. On account of its huge size it could not find room therein. Noah therefore tied it to the ark, and it ran on behind.[34] Also, he could not make space for the giant Og, the king of Bashan. He sat on top of the ark securely, and in this way escaped the flood of waters. Noah doled out his food to him daily, through a hole, because Og had promised that he and his descendants would serve him as slaves in perpetuity.[35]


Astral changes associated with the flood:

Quote:
The flood was produced by a union of the male waters, which are above the firmament, and the female waters issuing from the earth.[39] The upper waters rushed through the space left when God removed two stars out of the constellation Pleiades. Afterward, to put a stop to the flood, God had to transfer two stars from the constellation of the Bear to the constellation of the Pleiades. That is why the Bear runs after the Pleiades. She wants her two children back, but they will be restored to her only in the future world.[40]

There were other changes among the celestial spheres during the year of the flood. All the time it lasted, the sun and the moon shed no light, whence Noah was called by his name, "the resting one," for in his life the sun and the moon rested. The ark was illuminated by a precious stone, the light of which was more brilliant by night than by day, so enabling Noah to distinguish between day and night.[41]


The flood itself was part and parcel of some larger catastrophe which was almost certainly solar-system wide. It was preceeded by seven days of intense light, indicating some sort of a nova-like event or blowout of some sort:

King James Version:

Quote:

GEN 7:4 For yet seven days, and I will cause it to rain upon the earth forty days and forty nights; and every living substance that I have made will I destroy from off the face of the earth.

GEN 7:10 And it came to pass after seven days, that the waters of the flood were upon the earth.

ISA 30:26 Moreover the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold, as the light of seven days, in the day that the LORD bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound.


The section in the index of Ginzberg's Legends (vol 7) which absolutely connects Gen 7.4 and Isaiah 30:26:

http://tinyurl.com/75lp7v

http://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r53/icebear46/flood.jpg

In other words, Isaiah was not talking about cramming seven days worth of light into one day as is commonly supposed but rather was referring back to the light of the week preceeding the flood.

Nor is there any reason to think anybody would make up a complex story like that or refer to something like that without bothering to explain the reference unless he assumed the reference was common knowledge at the time.

  • Topic Stats
  • Top Replies
  • Link to this Topic
Type: Discussion • Score: 3 • Views: 6,835 • Replies: 136
No top replies

 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:04 pm
gunga wrote;


One animal, the reem, Noah could not take into the ark. On account of its huge size it could not find room therein. Noah therefore tied it to the ark, and it ran on behind.[34] Also, he could not make space for the giant Og, the king of Bashan. He sat on top of the ark securely, and in this way escaped the flood of waters. Noah doled out his food to him daily, through a hole, because Og had promised that he and his descendants would serve him as slaves in perpetuity.[35]

Well gunga old buddy...if og represents a dinosaur... and this dinosaur, who was able to converse with and enter agreements with a human, was to be a slave to Noah in perpetuity..... how'd that work out? Because I gotta tell ya, I'd love to have a couple of indentured dinosaurs for my events business.That would make pony rides look like a bugger. I'd clean up.
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:12 pm
@Bi-Polar Bear,
Reptilian advice for the evening... Don't let anybody without a medical degree on the wall touch you or anybody related to you with a needle of any sort. I have one asshole inlaw who wanted to have the coolest biker tatoo in all of southern jersey, who goes through life with medical devices attached on account of it. Life has enough problems which are unavoidable....

gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:13 pm
@gungasnake,
I said some of these details are fanciful; others appear to be sufficiently real.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:15 pm
@gungasnake,
The onliest problem is that you are unable to distinguish the two.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:15 pm
@gungasnake,
I appreciate the advice and will not denigrate it.... but I think the chances of that are about the same as the chances of me being struck by lightning... and I truly mean no disrespect...
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:23 pm
I've provided a2kers with a fabulous source of ancient literature here.

Anybody who spends any time going through it will notice that dinosaurs are referred to as oddities and apparently leftovers, the idea being that there were very small handsfull of such walking around at a time just prior to the flood.

To my thinking in particular, there is no way humans could have ever survived on this planet when it was inhabited by the smaller kinds of carnosaurs and raptors. Those would have to have been gone before humans got here.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:28 pm
@gungasnake,
The fact that you "Buy" into this Flood story with no apparent sense of skepticism tells me that you come from a special worldview through which all evidence is filtered .

I used to believe in all that stuff, then I learned to read and visited museums and my parents either took me or sent me to The petrified forest, Grand CAnyonDinosaur NAt Park, and the Allegheney Front .
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Dec, 2008 10:39 pm
Humans and most animals normally try to live near water. In fact they say that something like 80% of the targets we'd ever want to hit would still be within range of the guns of Iowa-class ships if they were still servicable. That's what made the battleship the ultimate weapon prior to the age of aircraft.

That also says that most (the overwhelming bulk) of all antediluvian remains are beneath the waves. That's probably why we don't find bones of dinosaurs and mammals intermixed.

0 Replies
 
NickFun
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 01:15 am
And that's why we have so many reems and giant ogs around today! Tell me Gunga, do the male waters have penises and the female waters have vaginas? So many unanswered theological questions!
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 05:51 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
That also says that most (the overwhelming bulk) of all antediluvian remains are beneath the waves. That's probably why we don't find bones of dinosaurs and mammals intermixed.




There are hundreds of thousands of drillholes in continental shelf and slope areas. None of them have ever shown that dinosaurs and mammals have been mixed. In fact, most of these drill holes out to the con shelf show marine deposits. SOme drill holes closer to shore do show some continental deposits but no evidence of mammals and dinosaurs together.

This is a very important "fact" for your hypothesis gunga. Its a falsification statement that is more responsible for revealing your hypothesis as false.

Boringly we seem to find ALL the dinosaurs from the Triassic to the Cretaceous and triconodont,symmetrodont pantothere , and multituberculate mammals all from the Jurassic to the K. Triconodonts and Multituberculates made it into the lower Eocene. MArsupial and Monotremes Appear in the Cretaceous and Placentals dont appear until the lower Eocene. We have excellent stratigraphic control on mammals nd dinosaurs and NOWHERE do we find anything that deviates from that sequence.
We dont have any evidence of dinosaurs and modern mammals living together. The only evidence is of mammals evolving more primitive orders during age of dicosaurs. MOdern mammals like Marsupials and placentals werent even in the fossil record until the Eocene when all dinosaurs had alredy disappeared. Monotremes, do seem to cross the boundary but weve only got a few fossil monotremes and theyre not even certain what a fossil monotreme would bring to the table since most of its characteristics are soft tissue dependent.

We should see , somehwere that mammals, dinosaurs, birds,reptiles and all styles of fish and srthropoda should exist together(Im not even gonna start with evidence about plants, but lets just say that your hypothesis doesnt stand up too well)

When you decide to buck scientific evidence, the only valid way is to present alternative evidence, not a vague statement that "These mammals and dinosaurs are probably out in the wave xone" Thats silly thinking. We often work with multiple hypothesis and then we test them. Thats the only valid way to present theories and advanced hypotheses. Your statements of hopeful ignorance are ludicrous from their face.
You admit that coexistence between mammals and dinosaurs is critical to your worldview, yet you are unable to admit that your explanation is not only without any evidence, it is clearly shown to be counter what scientific evidence already shows.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 05:53 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
The Old Testament of the Bible is laconic and appears in many places to be telling large stories in too few words.
Or as Ricky Gervais said
"Theres not a lot of detail in here, but heeeey, its the BIBLE, Its gotta be true, Right?"
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 07:58 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
The Old Testament of the Bible is laconic and appears in many places to be telling large stories in too few words.


This is what cracks me up. The several chapters of Genesis which deal with the flood are, if anything too prolix. They repeat the same information again and again, in slightly differing forms, and often creating contradictions. Scholars who study the textual nature of scripture consider that the flood myth as told in Genesis represents an inept attempt to reconcile several conflicting accounts at the time the Pentateuch was either first combined into a coherent body, or heavily revised after the Babylonian captivity.

It ain't just that Gunga Din here peddles so much bullshit, it's how consistently he is wrong about just about everything.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 07:59 am
@gungasnake,
Quote:
Jews simply have more writing from further back than anybody else does.


Here's another classic example . . . his ignorance is just breathtaking.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:20 am
As I noted, humans generally live near water. You'd expect most if not all remains of antediluvian human settlement to be beneath the waves and in fact entire cities are now starting to turn up beneath the waves.

http://members.toast.net/rjspina/Japan%27s%20Underwater%20Ruins.htm

http://members.toast.net/rjspina/images/toursteps.jpg

http://members.toast.net/rjspina/images/tourdrainage.jpg
100' down...

Other megalithic remains have been found off of India and in fact off of Cuba at great depths:

http://www.s8int.com/water19.html


rosborne979
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:26 am
@gungasnake,
Oops, I almost slipped in a big pile of snake oil.
0 Replies
 
gungasnake
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:31 am
I mentioned that the flood was part and parcel of a larger solar-system wide calamity of some sort. As far as we have been able to detect so far this planet is all which remains of the system which is still habitable for anything beyond bacteria. Nonetheless there are unmistakable signs of prior intelligent life in other places in the system. Mars is the most obvious case, but then there is also Saturn's little moon Iapetus with its great circle wall:

http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect19/Sect19_19a.html

http://rst.gsfc.nasa.gov/Sect19/iapetus_wall.jpg

Quote:
The nature of this feature is still puzzling....


No ****.... My own theory is that there must have been something like slammites or demoKKKrats on it, and the normal people built a wall and simply gave the assholes their own half of the place to live on.
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:33 am
@gungasnake,
Those "megalithics" are actually gabbro and basalt . All the rocks have structures that are displaced by the movement between theblocks. That indicates that it was all one rock unit that had fractured. No humans are needed. This was studied at some depth a few years ago and the conclusions were all the same. No "Atlantis" , its a flood basalt with horizontal and vertical joints. This is a common feature
farmerman
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:35 am
@gungasnake,
You are an amazingly gullible soul.
0 Replies
 
djjd62
 
  1  
Reply Wed 24 Dec, 2008 09:43 am
A certain American religious sect has been looking at conditions of the world during the Flood. According to their calculations, during the Flood the winds, tides and currents were in an overall southeasterly direction. This would mean that in order for Noah's Ark to have ended up on Mount Ararat, it would have to have started out several thousand miles to the west. This would then locate pre-Flood civilization somewhere in the area of Upstate New York, and the Garden of Eden roughly in New York City.

Now, in order to get from one place to another, something must move. No one in New York remembers moving, and there are no traces of Biblical history in the Upstate New York area. So we are led to the only available conclusion in this time warp, and that is that the Ark has simply not left yet.


Laurie Anderson - excerpt from United States Live
 

Related Topics

 
  1. Forums
  2. » The Biblical Flood and its Nature
Copyright © 2021 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 09/28/2021 at 08:43:43