Noah and the Ark

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Sure, its own terms. If you were to pick up a Mad Magazine (I haven't in years but I assume that it's still the same) you will approach that "literature" on its own terms. You expect something silly and nonsensical. You might groan at some of the "jokes" rather than laugh, but you are engaging the writers on their own terms.

I chose a rather extreme example to prove my point here.

However, the same approach should be used for the Bible. Is the Bible a book intending to tell the Natural History of the earth and cosmos? No.

The Bible is a collection of books written over a large period of time and so it's safe to say that there were many different local and immediate motivations behind its words. But throughout, we find the overall message is one of God's supernatural dealings with mankind.

Thus, it would be as wrong to look for a full and "accurate" Natural History of our planet from within the pages of the Bible as it would be to seek serious information regarding the U.S. Constitution on the pages of Mad Magazine.

There is no evidence whatsoever in the geologic record that the entire continental surface of the planet was covered by water withing any period in the past 6,000 years - or even a million years - or a billion!

The dimensions of an entirely wooden vessel such as the Ark of Genesis 6 could not have stayed afloat for the 4 months to a years as required by the various interpretations of Genesis.

The animals described could not have been kept alive for that time period given the dimensions and conditions of such a wooden vessel.

Nowhere in the Bible does it say that this literally happened anyway, so why should we insist that it did? Our insistence serves no purpose and actually harms the faith of those who may be turning to Bible for helpful answers in this modern age.

It says it happened. It doesn't say it literally happened, nor does it say it was all just a parable (or whatever). The Bible also says Jesus was resurrected. Was that a literal event? How do we know what to take literally, and what not to? If there is no physical evidence of something, do we assume it was figurative? Where's the physical evidence of Jesus' resurrection, today?

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by Timmy

It says it happened. It doesn't say it literally happened, nor does it say it was all just a parable (or whatever). The Bible also says Jesus was resurrected. Was that a literal event? How do we know what to take literally, and what not to? If there is no physical evidence of something, do we assume it was figurative? Where's the physical evidence of Jesus' resurrection, today?

Ultimately, whatever one believes about the Bible, one must believe by faith.

I don't believe the literal 6 day creation because such an event MUST have left some evidence. But there is none; and the evidence that we do have shows that this simply did not happen.

NOTICE: I DID NOT SAY, "It could not have happened." I said that it did not happen.

I don't believe the fundamentalist's version of "Noah's Flood" because such an event MUST have left some evidence and there is none. Again, I'm NOT saying that God COULD NOT have done this. I am saying that if He had done this then there would have been evidence that He did.

There is no evidence that He did. None. And those who insist that there is have been responsible for such fraud that even people like Aquila have abandoned that cause.

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is another matter. If it did happened, what evidence should we expect to find? Eyewitness accounts? A significant stirring and cultural upheaval as the accounts spread?

Well, we do have evidence of that.

[Timmy]

Originally Posted by pelathais

. . .

The resurrection of Jesus Christ is another matter. If it did happened, what evidence should we expect to find? Eyewitness accounts? A significant stirring and cultural upheaval as the accounts spread?

Well, we do have evidence of that.

Good point. Not sure what physical evidence there could be for it! As for eyewitness accounts, do you believe any of the Gospels were written by eyewitnesses? None of them claim to be, far as I recall. Are there other eyewitness accounts, either Biblical or extra?