Ah, excuse me...it's God who came up with the idea of flooding the entire earth, not messianic sects. And yes, it was about grave sins...and not just limited to the grave sins of locals in the northern Iraq.

Genesis tells us that after the banishment of Adam and Eve from the Garden, mankind became more sinful. "And God seeing that the wickedness of men was great on the earth, and that all the thought of their heart was bent upon evil at all times," declared the enormity of the sins which was so provoking as to destroy all human beings save for Noe and his family. 6:5-6,   

yes, kill all the innocent with the bad, destroy all animals, etc... makes perfect sense... despite god being powerful enough to, say, selectively kill all the firmborns, he can't just selectively kill all the bad people.

Also, there was a flood, it hit pretty hard in that area, it did not cover the land, it did not kill everyone, it did not affect other continents, there was no ark, and it was not caused by god.

Again, the Bible doesn't tell of such a flood, only later translations do.

And those translations were made by messianic sects.

It doesn't matter how often you feel that you can "excuse" yourself, but simply contradicting my statement (which I based on a word-for-word translation of the Hebrew text) is not the same as correcting me.

If G-d had come up with the idea of flooding the entire world, He would have said so in the Bible. The fact that He did not confirms what we know about the number of species and the population of the world 4000 years ago.

Of course there was a flood. Mesopotamia floods regularly and I would be surprised if "Noah" of all people hadn't lived through one.

It did, as the Bible says, cover the entire land (the land being Aram Naharaim, i.e. northern Iraq), and it possibly did kill everyone in that land (note that that land is a gigantic valley formed around two gigantic rivers). It absolutely did not affect other continents.

There probably was an ark. (Why not?) It was of the size of a large trade boat. There were lots of boats of the type on the Tigiris and Uephrates at the time. They all transported people as well as animals and supplies.

Whether it was caused by G-d is a matter of faith. I think it was (like everything else is), you think it was not. That's the part the Bible claims that we cannot possibly prove.

But as for the other details, they are probably true as long as they remain possible. And a flood covering the entire land (of Aram Naharaim) is quite possible indeed. However, translating "land" as "planet Earth" and "all animals" as "all animals on Earth" makes the story physically impossible and, in case anybody cares, a non-literal interpretation.

Here is the dictionary entry that should clear up everything:

(Taltamir, correct me if I make mistakes, I am guessing the vowels.)

http://www.milon.co.il/general/general.php?term=land

The first word in the first row of Hebrew is "eretz" meaning "land", which is the word used in the Bible for the thing that is flooded. It is translated into Latin as "terra", which also means "land", and into German as "Erde", which means "land" and "planet Earth".

The first two words in the second row are infinitives of a different root meaning "to land". The first is a pa3al verb (active voice) "linachoth" = "to land" (same root as the name "Noach"), the second is a pi3el verb (causative) "lehanachith" = "to make someone land" (also same root).

I meant cover ALL land not THE land as in... I am sure you could section a plot of land on coordinates X,Y that was completely covered

Basically the flood was similar to the tsunami that hit asia a couple of years back, caused lots of damage in many countries, and then got hyped into a waterworld kind of deal.

Well, the flood apparently did cover "all the land" and the land was Noah's home land.

I think it probably was about Tsunami size, impactwise.

I can certainly buy that story much more than the one I was sold when going through sunday school.

According to the Bible the story was told to the Israelites 3300 years ago. But at that point the story was already well-known. Whatever Noah's real name was (we don't know), the Bible referred to him just as "the landed".

Imagine the world 3300 years ago and imagine a nation of shepherds. Do you think any of them had a round world completely overed in water in mind when they were told this story? Do you think they thought of kangaroos on the ark? Do you think G-d didn't know that these people had no idea that the world was round and that there were kangaroos in Australia?

The entire idea that the story is telling us of a world-wide flood is ludicrous. The text doesn't say it and the audience had no way of even imagining it.

I am absolutely sure the bible's recording of an ark and a flood are accurate.  I've studied this at length and given much time and effort into it.  What I found in my studies of this time period are amazing in that there is no way someone could make all this up.  The whole ark story is a picture of Christ.  Jesus himself gave credence to this story by saying that the last days will be just like the days of Noah....men and women will be drinking and eating and marrying and then BAM....they will fall to their knees when the judgment of God comes upon the earth yet once again.  I believe we're close and the attitudes and actions of the people today are very close to being the same as "in the days of Noah."   Just as they didn't believe Noah back then neither will they believe us. 

Just a few of my very brief thoughts as I read what you all were saying.....

yes it does even in the earliest translations.....and Moses wrote about this way before any Messianic sects (whom are you speaking of) came into play. 

This was the first time it rained according to the scriptures.  Before this flood, caused by not only the rain falling from heaven but also the fountains from the deep exploding, there was merely a mist that watered the land.  Many call it a greenhouse atmosphere.  There was no flooding or rain before the flood. 

but it did.  The topography was changed as a result of the flood.  What we see today with the continents separated like this we did not have before the flood. 

He did.  Not only in the account in Genesis but also in the NT by the writings of the Apostles.  Like I showed you yesterday Leauki, there was a man whose name was Richard Dick Wilson who spoke and read 45 languages fluently and his research revealed that everyword of the OT scriptures translated into the English is correct.  He had no such qualms about the language like you seem to yet he mastered every language he could and did so for the express reason to be able to study the biblical languages to make sure what we were reading was correct.  His linguistic ability and his research was and is very valuable to us.

Yes faith in his word that what we are reading is indeed true...... but hopefully soon more evidence.  While there have been countless corroborating stories over the years about people seeing the ark (very large boat)  inbedded in rock in modern Turkey there is yet another group going up into those mountains to investigate this.  I heard there's an expedition going up this coming summer. 

the flood was nothing like the tsunami but the tsunami gives us a glimpse of how devestating a world wide flood could have been and how the animals could have moved onto that Ark.  That incidence in Indonesia gives us a glimpse of how it might have been that Moses wrote about thousands of years ago. 

so you'd rather believe a lie that man told than the truth that God revealed to us thru his word?  Hmmmm doesn't make sense to me but diff boats for diff folks. 

Yes it does and it makes absolute sense.  And we really do have a way of imagining it.  Why would you say that?  With the devestating tsunamis  it really does give us a modern take on an old account.  Just like God to do this.  Everything he does as the end nears is to give people every chance to see him and believe his revealed word to mankind.  That way nobody in their right mind when they stand before him will say......"I didn't know." 

that's the problem...it's not about what "YOU think" but all about what the records reveal. 

I am too absolutely sure the Bible's recording of an ark and a flood are accurate. I am just telling you that the Bible does NOT speak of a world-wide flood or an ark that rescued ALL species of animal.

It was the Christians who interpreted the story as a story about a world-wide flood. The Hebrew text does NOT say such.

Yes, and before those messianic sects the flood story was as the Bible told it: local to a certain land.

oh so I'm not credible because I don't speak Hebrew?  Or Greek? That's not true either because it really wouldn't matter because there are many who went before me who did speak and understand Greek and Hebrew and they weren't believed either.  It goes much deeper than that. 

 BTW....Latin came later...4th Century after the whole book was written and compiled.  If you want to be credible.....you should at least read this book before you spout off about something you don't know nor understand.  If you want a very literal English translation that is as close to the original languages as it can be go get yourself an NASB version.  The other versions are fine and good but the NASB is as close as one can get to the original as can be and still be readable in our language. 

really? And you know this as fact?  You didn't answer my questions...how many animals are we talking about?  How big is the boat?  You did the math?  Well I've got the numbers and know this is mathmatically very doable with room left over. This boat's dimensions (as written in scripture) are  pretty amazing.  Here's a quote from an author on this subject:

"The Ark was, according to the specifications laid down to be 300 cubits long by 500 cubits wide by 30 cubits highs.  The ratios of these numbers are very interesting.  They obviously reflect an advanced knowledge of ship building.  The Babylonian account which speaks of the Ark as a cube betrays complete ignorance.  Such a vessel would spin slowly around.  But the Bible ratios leave nothing to be desired."  Frederick Filby. 

Really?  Have you ever thought about hibernation?  Hmmm?  How long was the duration?  How many animals?   See El-D you're making assertions without having all the facts.  If you knew the facts you'd be better able to get at the truth.  But it's much easier to believe a lie.  I know that.  It's frustrating to read what you're saying here because I know you don't have all the facts yet you seem to be dogmatic. 

One of America's leading systematic taxonomists (expert) lists the following numbers for animal species according to the best estimates of modern taxonomy:

Mammals 3,500

Birds    8,600

Reptiles and amphibians    5,500

Worms      25,500

So we may reasonably conclude that no more than 35,000 individual vertebrate animals (probably average size of sheep) boarded this ark.  It has been estimated that a train hauling 150 boxcars could easily handle these animals.  But the Ark had a carrying capacity of more than 520 stock cars!  Plenty of room for the family and food to last the duration. 

the bible does mention these animals...but you've got to remember that the term dinosaur is a modern term brought up in the 1800's when these large animals started to get dug up.  So no, there's no Hebrew word dinosaur in scripture but the large animals thought to be dinos are in scripture... we know that dinos and humans didn't exist at the same time?  Really.  I don't know that.  Do you have privilege information?  You know this for sure?  Why because some Scientist said so?   I know the non-Christians want to believe that because they want to disprove scripture although from time to time we read about animals still roaming the earth today thought to be dinosaurs like some of the sea animals etc. 

of course you do.  Be honest.  When I hear the same parroting going on...I know. You have no idea how many times I've fielded these same, to the exact letter, questions.    It's the same old same old.  People are believing the same old lies because it's convenient and easier than searching out the truth themselves...that's why Jesus said "where your heart is there your treasure is also."  And it's the Christians  who are told they have no brains!!!  The studying and searching I've done over the last almost 40 years has not been easy...has taken alot of my time but at least I know that I'm not believing something just because someone told me so. 

Besides when you made that comment about man and dino's you got that from somewhere did you not?  Have you even taken into consideration paintings on caves 1500 years B.C. that include painting of brontosaurs?  According to the nature of their art, cavemen only painted from what they could actually see.  Thus they would have had to see a brontosaur in order to paint one.  And have you read the book of Job?  It's the oldest of all the biblical writings yet he writes some of the earliest writings about what we call dinos today.  I'm guessing that Job was aware of these very large animals.  But of course, the scientists are reporting something else (that keeps changing btw) so you need to believe them even though they have no hard packed evidence to rely on.  It's purely guesswork and conjecture based on their own prejudice and bias until something else comes up. 

I can hardly believe what you're saying El-D....you tell me you haven't read this for years....then you say there are inconsistencies but you can't remember specifics?  I zoom in on exactly what I know you're referring because I've  heard this before (by other agnostics), studied it out and you dismiss me?  Are you saying what I just told you makes no sense?  Could it possibly be the inconsistency lies with you not the written scripture?  Could it be that indeed we could be reading something chronologically and then topically? 

There is only one possible interpretation.  We are fallible.  The scriptures are not.  If you and I and Leauki all have diff interpretations, we are not all right.  This should drive us to look closer and outside of our ownselves to get at the truth.  The scripture always interprets scripture.   The truth sometimes can take a while to get at especially when it's surrounded by so many lies. 

again this is where you and I get into semantic disagreements.  You don't look at the whole picture.  You don't see the woods only the one tree in your sights. 

Think about this.....if the flood was local then God lied to Noah when he promised never to send a destructive flood again (9:11).  But we know there have been many local destructive floods ever since.

Flood traditions can be found in the history of every ancient civilization culture.  The early aborigines of nearly every country of the world have preserved records of the universal flood.  A Scientist I read about once collected 46 flood legends from North and South America, 20 from Asia, 5 from Europe, 7 from Africa and 10 from South Sea islands and Austrailia. 

Marine fossils have been found atop mountains.  Scientists of the 19th century were dismayed to find that as high as they climbed the rocks yielded skeltons of marine animals, ocean fish, and shells of mollusks.  A whale's skelton was once found on the top of Mt. Sanhorn on the Artic Coast and other similar skeltons a mile high on California's coastal range. 

So I have no choice to believe this was world wide Leauki.  Believe what you want but to me the evidence is overwhelming and the way the scriptures read it's quite clear this was no ordinary flood. 

KFC, how do you explain the existance of animals not native to mesapotamia?

That is... how did noa get a pair of australian or texan or other animals native to continent across the ocean?

1: they evolved after the flood (but no, evolution IS EVUL!!!)

2: He magically teleported them (magic is evil)

3: They walked over like the bible says they did (no wait, they can't, there is an ocean in the middle)

4: the story is wrong.

Taltimer posts:

This is nonsense.

The Douay Rheims Version is the most accurate and reliable translation of St.Jerome's Latin Vulgate (405AD), which in turn is a word-for-word translation from the original languages. St.Jerome was a consummate linguistic genious...Greek Speaking from birth, knew Latin and Hebrew perfectly, and also had the advantage of having many manuscripts to work from that are no longer extant.

So, sorry about that.....no sale as far as putting forth the idea we can't credibly argue or take passages from Scripture literally using these translations.  All Scripture inspired of God is profitible to teach, to reprove, to correct and to instruct in justice.

or.......

1.  They could evolve after the flood.  Many did.  We have more species now than before.  Christians have no problem with species evolving from their own kind.  It's the whole fish turning into a bird thing we have trouble with....or a watermelon into a tomato. 

2. Scripture says that God himself gathered these animals Gen 7:8-9.  When the tsunami happened in Indonesia what was interesting was there were very few dead animals found because the reports were they were running towards higher ground.  Gave us a bit of insight what could have happened.  It says the fountains of the deep exploded so probably the animals sensed what was about to happen and went to higher ground where Noah was building his Ark.

3.  The indication is strong that prior to the flood the continents of the earth were not separated by vast bodies of water as they are today....but I already said this above. 

4.  The story is not a story at all.  It's history. 

This is true but Lula that's what is being asserted here....a translation from a translation.  The DR is the English from the Latin which is from the Gk. 

But the NASB is directly from the Hebrew and Greek which is more reliable.  The DR is good as far as the translation from the Latin is concerned but not necessarily from the original language and you do lose some meaning when you do it that way.  It would have been better if the DR was directly from the GK and Hebrew.  It's not.  It's from the Latin.  Now the Latin was ok and Jerome was certainly very linguistic but then to go from that to the English isn't totally going to be translated with 100% accuracy. 

....I think that's why you and I had some conversations about diff words back along......remember body?  and vulture?