Comments on: Noah and the Flood (Part 3) http://www.anatheist.net/2008/11/noah-and-the-flood-part-3/ Atheism & Religious Skepticism Wed, 17 Mar 2010 12:44:21 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1 hourly 1 By: Michael http://www.anatheist.net/2008/11/noah-and-the-flood-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1832 Michael Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:00:03 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=922#comment-1832 As a mythical story goes, it's a pretty crappy one - even without the direct contradictions it doesn't hold up to the lightest of examinations (even as myth). So-called `primitive' societies have more cohesive (and frankly - imaginative) mythical stories than this and most of the rest of the early bible - I suspect either the original authors were just really thick, or more likely it has been corrupted and mixed up over time. It was probably just some allegorical myth story which was never meant to be taken literally, but whose original meaning and purpose has been lost and corrupted. I wonder if they'll be talking about FSM like it's real in 1000 years? How anyone without some mental disorder could believe it ... is quite amazing. I wonder just how many people do believe it - or is it just a vocal minority? It is just sad. We can put a man on the moon, yet people still believe this utter garbage. Then again, that was decades ago ;-) As a mythical story goes, it's a pretty crappy one – even without the direct contradictions it doesn't hold up to the lightest of examinations (even as myth). So-called `primitive' societies have more cohesive (and frankly – imaginative) mythical stories than this and most of the rest of the early bible – I suspect either the original authors were just really thick, or more likely it has been corrupted and mixed up over time. It was probably just some allegorical myth story which was never meant to be taken literally, but whose original meaning and purpose has been lost and corrupted. I wonder if they'll be talking about FSM like it's real in 1000 years?

How anyone without some mental disorder could believe it … is quite amazing. I wonder just how many people do believe it – or is it just a vocal minority?

It is just sad. We can put a man on the moon, yet people still believe this utter garbage. Then again, that was decades ago ;-)

]]> By: jamesatracy http://www.anatheist.net/2008/11/noah-and-the-flood-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1833 jamesatracy Mon, 12 Jan 2009 04:00:03 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=922#comment-1833 What is really interesting, at least to me, is the fact that the story as presented in the Bible is actually two separate and different versions cleverly edited together into one. This is why it seem to contradict itself on a number of points, such as whether the flood lasted for 40 days or 150 days, etc. So there were variations floating around. They also give us the impression of a much more primitive god who can't quite control his creation and is thus forced to drown it in order to start a new. Even then, the descendants of Noah are forced to disband because they become too powerful and threaten god as long as they speak one language. The myth uses fictional relationships between Noah's descendants to explain the relationships between various nations that existed during the author's time. It is certainly part of a much larger narrative in Genesis but fundamentalists tend to focus on the physicality of the supposed event and seem to miss the symbolic significance of the stories for the people who told and re-told them. What is really interesting, at least to me, is the fact that the story as presented in the Bible is actually two separate and different versions cleverly edited together into one. This is why it seem to contradict itself on a number of points, such as whether the flood lasted for 40 days or 150 days, etc. So there were variations floating around. They also give us the impression of a much more primitive god who can't quite control his creation and is thus forced to drown it in order to start a new. Even then, the descendants of Noah are forced to disband because they become too powerful and threaten god as long as they speak one language. The myth uses fictional relationships between Noah's descendants to explain the relationships between various nations that existed during the author's time. It is certainly part of a much larger narrative in Genesis but fundamentalists tend to focus on the physicality of the supposed event and seem to miss the symbolic significance of the stories for the people who told and re-told them.

]]> By: Noah and the Flood (Part 2) | anatheist.net http://www.anatheist.net/2008/11/noah-and-the-flood-part-3/comment-page-1/#comment-1141 Noah and the Flood (Part 2) | anatheist.net Tue, 11 Nov 2008 16:55:19 +0000 http://www.anatheist.net/?p=922#comment-1141 [...] (Go directly to Part 3) Posted in Monday School [...] [...] (Go directly to Part 3) Posted in Monday School [...]

]]>