Sheshbazzar

The problem with this type of solution is that there is no known textual support for it, nor even so much as a shred of a tradition to give it any credence.
And again it falls due to it employing the very same "could-have-been" scenarios that Fundamentalist are regularly scorned on this Forum for employing, they are regularly clobbered for attempting to ignore, or alter even as little as a single letter to bring the text into line with their views, How would an attempt to alter so much of the text fare in light of atheists continually attacking Fundamentalist for so doing?
Best for all to just let the text read as it reads, contradictions and all.

John A. Broussard

Thank you for your lengthy, thoughful and sensitive response to my post.

You are absolutely correct. I don't accept your answer, since it isn't an answer to what I asked.

However, I will accept this offer: "Oh, by the way, I AM able to provide that metaphorical explanation."

Thank you.

Sheshbazzar

Sorry John, but it is not an offer.

John A. Broussard

Sorry about that. I thought your statement, "I AM able to provide that metaphorical explanation." was an offer to provide such an explanation.

I'll accept your inability to do so.

No hard feelings.

gregor

Shes

Was the implicit statement that the documentary hypothesis is wrong an offer to present your own article explaining authorship?

Johnny Skeptic

What about the over one million species of insects, the millions of species of microorganisms that Noah didn't even know existed, and the coral reefs in the oceans that would have all died because of a lack of adequate sunlight? Science continues to discredit the absurd notion of a global flood.

Sheshbazzar

No, I will not present any such article, as to do so would be a redundant waste of time, you have access to the Internet to search out the tens of thousands of articles that have already been written on this subject.

Rather than a long article, I'll summarize them all in this short statement;

There have been found to be so many flaws and holes in the assumptions, reasonings and methodologies of the so called "documentary hypothesis", that its use as a "standard" to look up to and rally around has long since been discredited. Yes boys, that old flag (rag) that the atheists have fixed their eyes and hopes upon and rallied around for the past century has had so many holes shot in it, its flawed weave is coming unwoven, day by day more and more of its fabric is shredding and blowing away upon the wind.
Yes, take a good close look at that "emblem" of your campaign and of your unity, that so proudly you hailed, but is now so full of holes, waving only its remnant of tattered shreds;
If you rally 'round that flag once again boys, its only because you don't know any better; Your patriotism to the cause, whilst your companions are sneaking away in the dark and deserting you, is a hoot to all that have eyes to see with, and have ears to hear with.

funinspace

I'll have to agree with Sheshbazzar, this is not a very viable contradiction to hang an argument on. Of all the issues/problems with the Deluge, this is pretty slim pickings.

Sheshbazzar, out of curiosity, do you consider the Deluge to have happened circa 2200-2400 BCE? I ask, because I wonder how you perceive the timeline from verses in Genesis 5:3-28 and 5:32,11:10-26.

gregor

Shes

If baseless assertions were money, you'd be a billionaire.

Sheshbazzar

Ah yes, I Am wealthy beyond any measure, and keep my treasure where men cannot steal it away.