I see a lot of talk about Noah's Ark and the Great Flood from Ex-Mos, Never-Mos, and Atheists. There are numerous memes and comments made about a very literal view of the Great Flood, like the one directly above. I mean, sure; I agree with Mark Twain. The Ark had no rudder and no sails. But, why would it have needed any? Where was it going? The Ark was designed to keep itself afloat. And again, this would render the need for any charts useless also.
But, that is not really the point that gets me. Atheists love to jump on the idea of getting two of every single species on the face of the Earth. Look at the following meme:
Nowhere in the Scriptures is the word "species" mentioned. Genesis 6: 19-21 states: "And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female. Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive. And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them." And, Genesis 7: 2-3 states: "Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female. Of fowls also of the air by sevens, the male and the female; to keep seed alive upon the face of all the earth." And, Genesis 7: 14 states: "They, and every beast after his kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after his kind, and every fowl after his kind, every bird of every sort." There is "kind" and "sort" mentioned, but nothing about species. Also, the Bible specifically mentions to bring kind/sort of fowls, creeping things, clean beasts, and unclean beasts. I see nothing to suggest that Noah brought every "species" (a concept and filing system completely unknown in the ancient world). I've never really figured out how or why Atheists get so hung up on that idea when it is nowhere in the Scriptures.
And, then there are those believers who look at the story as completely literal:
I agree with the idea that Noah's Flood was based on a real, great event that happened, but (and like many ancient histories) was written to focus on symbolism and overall meaning instead of historical accuracy. It is like an allegory, designed to teach us something about God. The date of the Flood differs depending on the Biblical scholar. The Masoretic Text of the Torah puts the Flood as 1,656 years after Creation, which have led scholars to put an exact date to the event. Scaliger said 3,950 B.C., Petu said 3,982 B.C., and James Ussher said 2,348 B.C. The 2,348 B.C. dating matches with many of the Biblical timelines that can be downloaded off the Internet and are commonplace in the Christian world. Scaliger and Petu date the flood to be much earlier. James Ussher's chronology matches closely with the creation tale of Korea and the birth of their first King in 2,333 B.C. King Dangun (단군왕검) came around during the 40th to 50th year reign of the Chinese Emperor Yao, who reigned from 2,356 B.C. to 2,255 B.C. When I lived in Korea and heard about the Creation tale of Korea and their first King, I remember it matching up with Ussher's Flood narrative chronology. China already had a long, established history that had no indication of having all their people die. With civilizations existing before and through the time of the flood, there doesn't seem to be much to point to everyone in the world dying except for Noah's family. This is why I believe that the "worldwide flood" was Noah's world--his idea and perception of what the whole world was, which was his area in the Middle East. National Geographic has a good explanation about the actual geological events that could have been the main source of the Flood Narrative, but I'd like to think there was more to the event than just a tidal issue.
And, no, this doesn't mean that Moses (or whoever wrote Genesis) lied. Saying that portraying a real even in allegory or as metaphor or symbolism is lying shows a deep misunderstanding of such concepts. I've never seen any evidence to show that Genesis was supposed to be taken as a historical document as many believers want to point out (with the 20th century idea of historicism, too).
And, not to mention Genesis 7: 18-20, which states, "And the waters prevailed, and were increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters. And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered." Fifteen cubits is 22.5 feet. That's not enough to cover much of anything. Mountains and highlands would have been completely dry. It seems like there are a lot of people who don't really look at the implication of that verse. This verse really did it in for me when it came to a global flood and something I've always wondered how Apologists like Ken Ham would respond.
There is a lot to be said here. I don't want to make this blog post too long. I believe the Bible is God's Word, but I've never held onto a literal interpretation of the Bible, especially the longer I've studied Literature, the more I can see the Bible in comparison to other works around it. I don't think this degrades the Bible in anyway, because Holy Men wrote the Bible and brought up forth knowledge of God. Noah was, I believe, a real person. He was mentioned in Hebrews 11:7, 1 Peter 3:20, and 2 Peter 2:5. But, I've always wondered how those of the New Testament timed viewed Noah and Flood Narrative, especially with their different mindset about history and their lack of archeological knowledge that we have nowadays.
My idea about looking at the Flood Narrative as allegory may not be popular. I've heard many tell me that I'm going against God's Word and degrading the Bible by saying my views about it. But, I don't see it this way. The central message is still there: God chose a Holy Man (a Prophet) to continue on as He did away with sin. He has watched over us and continues to take a personal interest in our lives.
No comments:
Post a Comment