Hello Leauki,

I understand your point.  However, legend, which most of Torah is (in my opinion) written down after being orally transmitted for hundreds of years, is evidence of the weakest kind. It amounts to heresay at best.

Place names and events are not evidence of authenticity of a story.  Writers construct stories all the time using actual places and events, but these do not make the stories true.

Be well.

kfc posts:

Excellent logical question. The answer of course pointing to a world-wide Flood.

SoDaiho posts #836



AdVentureDude posts:

That's my understanding as well. Rainbows couldn't have existed becasue there was no rain before man was created according to Genesis 2:5-6. "And every plant of the field before it sprung up in the earth and every herb of the ground before it grew; for the Lord God had not rained upon the earth; and there was not a man to till the earth. 6 But a spring rose out of the earth, watering all the surface of the earth. 7 and the Lord God formed man of the slime of the earth; and breathed into his face the breath of life, and man became a living soul."


The rainbow was more than a symbol, it was a covenant of friendship between God and Noah that would be kept for all mankind, not just those in the local area of Mesopotamia.
Genesis 9:18-19 records that "the sons of Noah came out of the Ark and from these was all mankind spread over the whole earth." From this it must be accepted that all mankind perished from the Flood.

The Lord God then promised to that He would never destroy all mankind again by Flood and He gave a rainbow as a sign of His covenant.

"Thus also said God to Noe and to his sons with him. 9 Behold I will establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you; 10 and with every living soul that is with you, as well as all the birds as in cattle and beasts of the earth, that are come forth out of the Ark, and in all the beasts of the earth. 11 I will establish my covenant with you and all flesh shall no more be destroyed with the waters of a flood, neither shall there be from henceforth a flood to waste the earth. 12 And God said: This is the sign of the covenant which I give between me and you, and to every living soul that is with you for perpetual generations. 13 I will set forth my bow in the clouds, and it shall be the sign of a covenant between me and between the earth. 14 And when I shall cover the sky with clouds, my bow shall appear in the clouds. 15 And I will remember my covenant with you, and with every living soul that beareth flesh; and there shall no more be waters of a flood to destroy all flesh. 16 And the bow shall be in the clouds, and I shall see it, and shall remember the everlasting covenant that was made between God and every living soul of all flesh which is upon the earth. 17 And God said to Noe: This shall be the sign of the covenant which I have established between me and all flesh upon the earth. 18 ANd the sons of Noe came out of the Ark were Sem, Cham, and Japhethl and Cham is the father of Chanaan. 19 These three are the sons of Noe and from these was all mankind spread over the whole world."


SoDaiho posts:

I read somewhere that a rainbow can only be formed upon water droplets greater than .30 millimeters in clouds. That's why I question your saying that rainbows can occur from mist. It may well be though, I don't know. Did you notice this passage mentions clouds several times..and for good reason...If there were no clouds and no rain before the Flood, rainbows therefore could have only come into existence after the Flood.



Genesis 2:6 clearly explains how all the plants got watered.

I tend to believe the Genesis account that there was no rain as anywhere on earth until the Flood in the literal sense.

SODAIHO posts:

The Torah is God's Word, so every word of it is true and free from error. However, what those words mean and how they are to be understood is a completely different ball game.




Yes, Genesis 2:6 explains the gardens and fields grew without rain and the dinosaurs could have eaten the leaves from plants and obtained plenty of liquid that way, not to mention drink from the spring.



Says you! I wholehearedly disagree but don't want to turn this blog into an evolution thread.




It's the global Flood that caused all the fossils for what other explanation can account for the immense sedimentary strata which covers about 3/4 of the planet? What would possibly account for the fossil graveyards over all the world filled with millions of fossils of creatures trapped in sedimentary pits?

You would have us believe something like slow uniformatarian processes, with periodic volcanic eruiptions, etc. but that has been shown to have major conceptual problems becasue various strata are greatly out of assumed order, nor can it account for the fossilized jellyfish and polystrate tree trunks fossils which must have been entombed rapidly. Only a catastrophe of a global Flood can explain why immense beds of fossils are found in otherwise inexplicable places that all date from the same time and would have had to be caught up in an enormous deposition turmoil.

    

The earth at the start was like a greenhouse. It was very moist and tropical. Remember we don't buy the millions of years theory. The first rain recorded in the Torah as Lula pointed out was when Noah got in that boat. Then it rained like no tomorrow.

You may want to get a book called "The Genesis Flood" by Henry Morris and John Whitcomb. The forward is by a John C McCampbell, PH.D Professor & Head Dept of Geology University of SW Louisiana. He wrote this:

"The authors have made a strong case and this volume offers a serious challenge to the uniformitarian position. They have in no way distorted this position but have opposed it in a courteous, fair and scholarly manner. I would suggest that the skeptical reader, in like fashion, before he dismisses the Biblical-literal viewpoint of this book as unworthy of notice, should at least give it careful reading and evaluation. He will find that the essential differences between Biblical catastrophism and evolutionary uniformitarianism are not over the factual data of geology but over the interpretations of those data. The interpretation preferred will depend largely upon the background and presuppositions of the individual student.

But in either case, whether one prefers the Biblical framework or that of modern historical geology, he should in fairness to himself and others consider both sides of the question with equal diligence. He will find great personal satisfaction from such careful analysis and interpretatin. In these days of intellectual and cultural conformity real independent thinking seems to be becoming a lost art. A volume such as this offers us the challenge to begin to think carefully and creatively concerning the great issues with which it deals."

Morris is a well known writer (now deceased) and Scientist dealing with this subject and has many books out there about the flood and related subjects. He was the leading exponent of creationism and traveled widely presenting the biblical record and its scientific implications when he was alive. Some of his other books are "The Genesis Record" "The Biblical Basis for Modern Science" and "The Long War Against God" among others. His books are still reprinted frequently.

Leauki posts: 846

There are differing versions of the Gilgamesh mythology. In Genesis, Noah is rewarded with an everlasting covenant between God and his descendants, while one story has it that Urnapishtim and his associates receive personal immortality and another cites a goddess's necklace flung to the sky!



My history book states that the polytheistic Sumerians formed their city states about 3000BC in the Tigris Euphrates valley. They are known for having invented the first writing system on clay tablets called cuneiforms. One of their literary works was the epic poem Gilgamesh supposedly written about 2600BC. Ficew small fragments of the Gilgamesh tablet, which tells the tale of a man named Ur-Napishtim and the Babylonian story of the flood, was discovered in 1872. Since then more fragments have been found.

Right...the sheer extent of fossilized tropical vegetation and animals which could have only lived in a temporate condition. The scientific explanation behind Genesis 1:6-7, is the canopy theory (part of the firmament). Scientists theorize that on Day 2, God activated a very strong magnetic field around the Earth and simultaneiously separated the waters below from the waters above. He lifted up sufficient water to expose the desired extent of dry land and then suspended it high in the atmosphere. A comprehensive explanation of this theory can be found in Joseph C. Dillows book, The Waters Above. They suggest that God instantly turned this water into super heated vapor and established it in a pressure temperature distribution...and thus, voila a greenhouse effect would have ensued...with temperate temperatures all over the globe, with lush vegetation growing everywhere. They suggest the atmospheric pressure would have been about 2.18 times of that of today's atmosphere thus facilitating giant forms of life to exist and it aided longevity as well.


If it's correct, rainbows would have only come into existence after the collapse of the canopy at the time of the Great Flood of Noah.

Ignoring the rainbow superstition...



Which is why we should read those stories carefully and find out how much if it can be true.

Heinrich Schliemann in the 19th century decided that the legend of Troy probably had a true core and went on to find the city of Troy (although not the one of the story but one built on top of it) and later we found more evidence for the war and now we know it really happened (although with fewer gods than the Greeks claimed).

If we assume the Torah is true, which as believers we do, we have all reason to assume, like Schliemann, that the facts mentioned can be verified. Sometimes the text is misleading and we might read it literally when it's not meant literally (or vice versa, read it symbolically when it is meant literally), but at its core, it's true.

Obviously focusing on the current meaning of an English word that meant something else 500 years ago when it was the translation of a Latin word that almost meant what the Hebrew word meant is not the best way to find the truth.



Exactly. And the oldest copy of the Torah we have is from 300 BCE.

From reading the Hebrew text it _appears_ to _me_ that Genesis and Exodus were written about 1000 BCE. I deduce this from making assumptions on how much language changes and how the written word was employed. Genesis and Exodus are both written in much simpler language than later books and both use fewer letters for vowels. The accumulated differences suggest, to _me_, an approximate date of 1000 BCE.

Unless Genesis was a children's book in 300 BCE, I think it is safe to say that it is a bit older. But it can't be much older than 1000 BCE because it uses an abjad (a form of alphabet) rather than symbols for words or syllables. The text also appears to have been made up with the abjad in mind (there are word games that wouldn't have worked if the story wasn't originally written in the abjad).

So whatever (Sumerian) stories Genesis is based on, it was WRITTEN down, in Hebrew, 3000 years ago or later.

What year did Noah and his family leave the Ark?

I agree. And would add that all the Books of Sacred Scripture are true since God is the principal Author. "All Scripture is inspired by God and is useful for teaching, for reproof, for correction, and for training in righteousness." 2Tim. 3:16; 2St.Peter 1:20-21.

Furthermore, since God is the Author, all the Sacred Books teach truth without error that God intends to reveal for the sake of our salvation. Truth is expressed in different literary forms, such as history, poetry, law, proverbs, songs, parables, and stories or descriptions of actual events that explain ultimate reality.



Genesis based upon Gilgamesh??? I don't think so.

I don't know.




Why don't you think so?

Are you denying that what G-d told Moses at Sinai is true and hence must have been the same as experienced by other people who wrote it down earlier?

LULA POSTS:

Leauki posts:





Becasue Gilgamesh is evidence of the Flood, not the other way around.

If my numbers are correct, God saved Noah and his family a couple thousand years before the Sumerian civilization of 3200 BC.

That may well be but Genesis was written in 1000 BCE the earliest. Hence Sumerian legends are the older source, hence Genesis is based on a Sumerian legend.

Incidentally, 5200 BCE (a couple thousands years before the Sumerian civilisation of 3200 BCE) is a good 1500 years before Adam, using the "shana" = "year" method of counting pre-Exodus time.

It doesn't matter when the Genesis account of the Flood was written. The Books were collected together around 550BC but so what? When they were written or that they were written after the Sumerian legend, while true, isn't the point...The Genesis account is God, through the hands of the various writers, in this case presumably Moses, telling us about the Flood and His account isn't based upon the Sumerian legend.

If we count the years of the world with Adam beginning with one, then Noah was saved in the year 1567 and the Sumerian civilization followed that by 2000 years.

Lula, in light of discussion with SoDaiho I have this question.

Did G-D stop 'creating' (creating something from nothing, not to be making something from what already existed) after the 7 days?

It is absolutely the point. If we are trying to understand the Bible, it is super-important when the Bible was written and where the stories came from.

(Unless you follow a stop religion, of course. In that case you just decide that enough research has been done and accept whatever found at the point as the ultimate truth.)



And who told you that?




When do you put Adam and why?

He stopped after 6 days, and rested, because it was finished.

If it was finished, rain must have existed already.

Unless He created rain after it was finished.

He created water.

Leauki posts:

Last time, .....the Genesis account of the FLood is not based upon the Sumerian legend, Gilgamesh. I know this becasue a. God caused the Flood. and b. He described the account of it through the writers (presumably Moses) of Genesis. That's why we know it's true. c. the Flood occurred first, the Sumerian legend came afterwards. The Gilgamesh was only one of the many legends that were told based upon the reality of the Flood.

What a jolly conversation!

Lula claims Jesus was without sin, and yet she quotes Paul constantly instead, along with his prop Timothy. (A convicted murderer and convicted out of his own mouth.) She does however need to do "research" to know what Jesus said. tsk...tsk...tsk

She argues along with the rest of you as to who's story of the flood came first, Noe's or Gilgamesh's. And did or did not rain and rainbows exist beforehand. As if it matters.

Leauki came quite close in his statement that "god sent Cain into the earth". You should have kept going with that one, you might have discovered something there. It's something that you all will have to deal with in the future. Don't think so? Go and check out Revelations.

You come close, but like a bunch of burnt cats you dance away when it is either too confusing or too scary.

You refuse to listen to Sodaiho, who quite frankly makes more sense than the lot of you put together.

Please continue, I am greatly enjoying this conversation.

Pish tosh!

None of that proves that the flood story isn't based on a Sumerian legend.

You are assuming that a) G-d cannot cause a flood to happen to a Sumerian individual and G-d would never tell Moses a story the Sumerians already knew.

Both are implicit assumptions you make that you have refused to prove.

Fact is the flood story was already known before Moses wrote it down. Evidence for that is that Semitic legends of other tribes also tell of the flood story (and Noah) but not of the Exodus (the Mandaeans for example).

And that doesn't even address the fact that you _know_ nothing. Since you don't care to do more research (and are following a stop religion), you will never know. You _believe_ that G-d caused the flood. And you _believe_ (for some reason) that G-d sold the story exclusively to Moses, despite the fact that other peoples knew about the story as well.

Rain wasn't 'created' water was during creation. Since water already existed than rain was made with an already existing substance.

However TO Leuki's point: It seems we have a consensus that EVERYTHING was created during the 6 days.

With that we can conclude that light refraction through water was created during creation with the physical properties of water?

What we don't know is if light refraction through water creating a rainbow was known or seen. Genesis 2:6 offers an interesting piece. Unlike Lula's translation for 'Spring' the Hebrew offers 'Mist' (ואד) the root being 'ade' is only translated to mist. The verb suggests that this mist ascended. We don't know how far but it doesn't have to be vary high for a rainbow to be seen (ie watch a sprinkler).

So it is HIGHLY possible that rainbows did exist prior to the flood however the covenant is more specific than just a 'rainbow.' It was a rainbow in the clouds (הקשת בעןן) Note the beit prefix in awnan - meaning cloud which denotes 'in'.

This explanation encompasses what SoDaiho, Leuki, and Lula have mentioned and not to forget Scriptures and in keeping with consistency?

Of course it was. I agree with this. Everyone knew. It was quite a story to tell after the fact. Can you imagine Noah's three sons, Ham, Shem (where the semitics came from) and Japeth saw when they first got out of that boat and what they told their children?

I don't know all the details (but can find out) my son was telling me there is some thought that Moses did not write all this down but it was passed to him and he compiled it all before his death and language is the reason why this is thought to be so. I just took for granted Moses wrote the first five books. He may have with written notes from some of those who were previous. Anyhow Moses is credited for the Torah and most likely was the one who either transcribed it all or put it all together with his own written words from his life on. But I wouldn't say it would be out of line to say written words were kept by those beforehand and heanded down to Moses.

BTW my dates for the Torah is about 1450-1410BC and if Adam say wrote down his version and it was passed to Moses, it would have been many years before this time. The 1450 BC would have been Moses' time. Job as the oldest book has no written date as to when it was written down.

AD, the Midrash Raba for Genesis says that a mist arose from the ground. And as anyone can atest, it does not take much mist in the air for light refraction to take place.   This said, I find it highly unlikely that from the legandary time of Adam to the time of Noah, what had to be millenia, there was no rain. Without rain there is no vegetation, period. Besides this there was tons of water vapor in the air. 

But let's take Lula and KFC's point here.  Suppose that for the centuries (or in my estimation, millenia) between the time of Adam and the time of Noah, there were huge bodies of water on the earth.  Let's assume that there were.  And let's assume thatthe ambient temperatures are pretty much as they are now, or even a few degrees cooler...where did all that evaporated water go? Clouds form, but never dissapate?  Good grief.

This is a case were science and common sense come up against a scriptual story and for some, the story wins. No matter how nonsensical it might be.

Be well.

Stop! These are not my assumptions.

You claim the Genesis account of the Flood is based upon the Sumerian legend, Gilgamesh. I say you are wrong and rely on the actual timetable of events for proof....First, God caused the Flood which was later described according to God's Word in Genesis. 2000 years or so after the Flood occurred, the Sumerians wrote a legend on tablets about the Flood of Noah but, lacking God's Revelation in Genesis(which hadn't been written yet)it contained some similiarities yet many differences.

Gilgamesh is a mythical legend about the actual Flood of Noah, and Genesis is a first hand account of the Flood.

AD posts: #864

JYTHIER POSTS:



Add mine to that. In those 6 days, God created the whole world, visible and invisible, material and spiritual out of nothing by HIs almighty will. With the creation of man, God's plan of creation was completed and the great work of His creative love was crowned for man is the most perfect of His visible creation. He appointed the 7th day for man's rest in Him.



Thanks AD, Good work.....your explanation certainly seems reasonable and plausible. Whenever the word rainbow comes up in regard to Noah, I always think of the covenantal rainbow in the clouds.



A "misty" bow to you on this one!