Dharma

After reading the story of Noah and the biblical "all knowing God"...I was just wondering just how "all knowing" this God was since he thought the tallest mountain was somewhere in the middle east, Mt. Ararat? Any comments? And since this information seems untrue, what does it tell one about the validity of the Bible?

Metacrock

Not much. TElls me a lot about your understanding of theology.


where does it say that God put them out where the tallest mountin was? It says that's the moutin that was showing where they happen to be. That doesnt' mean Mt. Everist wasn't also showing above the water, but they weren't in Teibet.


my pages on Biblical revelation, please read for a more sophisticated and up todate understanding.



http://www.geocities.com/metacrock20...Models_rev.htm

Dharma

ooh, now we have to read YOUR translation?

well, since I noticed most Christians don't really read the bible, let's discuss the passages of Noah:

Genesis 8:
8:4 mentions ark landing on the tops of the mountains of Ararat...then it goes to say:
8:5 mountain tops were visible AFTER wards...

8:9 mentions a dove being sent and not returning since the waters still covered the earth...

so according to gen 8.9, the mountain tops of Ararat can be seen, but after releasing the dove, the dove could not spot the Himalayas since the Himalayas are short and PUNY mountains compared to the Big mountain Ararat... buried beneath the flood . So Ararat was soooo high, higher than the Himalayas that they can't be seen...for certainly, the all knowing One God of Israel would certainly know the tallest mountains in the world??? So this means this God, was "Somewhat knowing" or perhaps you guys have your geography all wrong? :rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

Metacrock

I see you didn't read my page. No it's not a translation. It's a discussion about the nature of revelation itself. I aruge that inerrency is just a bit theolgoical bagage fromt he 19th century and it doesnt' constitute the origininal chruch position on revelation.

thus my argument is that the Flood myth can be a myth and the Bible still be inspired and authoriative as the word of God.


Want to know how? Read the page.

Chris Weimer

Inerrancy is still well-defended today, and I don't think he was criticising you then but inerrantists. A big fat d'uh for the boy who missed the obvious.

Metacrock

\


I didnt' think he was criticizing me. I thought he was dismissing the whole Bible because he assumes inerrency is the only view to take if you beileve the Bible, and its' not. So double duh for the more obvious. :wave:

Chris Weimer

How's this, if the Deluge can be mythical, when do we distinguish between history and mythology? He wasn't denouncing the whole Bible, he asked how valid is it. The answer remains, skeptical like all mythological texts. Treat it no differently than Herodotus.

Dharma

well, atleast you admit that Mt. Ararat is not the tallest mountain, and that story seems, ahem, "errant"...
:rolling: :rolling: :rolling:

So now the argument is that the Bible can be full of holes (er, shall we say, perhaps just the errant interpretation of the church), yet we must not dismiss the bible .

Indeed, let us say for arguments sake that I agree that it is a "revelation", in that tradition of revelation than do you consider other texts of this world to be "revealed" scripture, despite their , "errancies"... or do you consider them "pagan" ?

Chili

It has to be the tallest mountain if that is where dry land first appeared. If it was the second highest mountain Noah would have missed the mark and would have received a scorpion instead of a fish. In this sense are we all ark builders:

If he had know
unstructured space is a deluge
and stocked his life house-boat
with all the animals . . . even the wolves,
he might have floated.

But obstinate he stated:
the land is solid and stamped,
watching his foot sink down
through stone
up to the knee.

Vorkosigan

Chili, why do you post this here? Have you made even a single convert to your weird allegorizing in all your time here? What is it you hope to achieve? Bandwidth costs money, Chili. Why are you wasting Infidels'?