Poll - Noah’s Flood - Factual or Figurative?

[DrWojo]

I created this poll under the history category and open it for All Mennonet users to participate, regardless of affiliation or denomination. In the past when I was curious about what MN users believed on vaccinations, prophecy, church drift, etc. I’d create a poll. Here’s a new one to vote on and leave a comment.

[Mayberry]

If I were to choose #2: "The retelling of a historic event in a figurative way, not a list of facts, but to communicate a message about God and humanity to humankind," what other portions of Scripture do I simply declare to be figurative? I am not speaking here of the obvious: poetic style, parables, and the like. If the opening verses of the Bible are only figurative, could the entirety of Scripture then possibly be in danger?

If we choose to declare the Creation account to be of a figurative character of some sort, we are doing no more than polishing the bottom side of Satan's toboggan so that we might join him in the slide down the slippery slope of disbelief and denial. This sort of comfort is for only a short period of time. Then ...

[Neto]

If you start out with a fictional reading of the Bible, when & how do you cut it off? But further, Jesus and others spoke of Noah and Abraham, even Adam, as though they were real historical figures. (I feel the same way about the story of Job, too.)

[Ken]

I have no doubt that there have been massive floods over time. They happen to this day in some parts of the world.

But the "world" as understood by the ancient Israelites was tiny. The known world at the time of Noah was what? 500 or 1000 miles across? A flood covering most or all of those lands is conceivable.

But a flood that covered the entire world as we know it today with rain water in 40 days and 40 nights? The average elevation of the earth's continents is 2759 ft. So a flood that only covers half the earth's surface would require a layer of water covering the globe to a depth of 2759 ft. Without doing the math, that seems at least a doubling of the total volume of all the world's oceans. And that would still leave half the world's land mass dry. To fully cover the entire planet with water would require several more times the volume of all the world's oceans combined.

Rain water does not come from nowhere, it comes mostly from evaporation of the world's lakes and oceans. The total volume of water on earth is actually incredibly stable. Sea levels rise and fall over time as the world's ice caps and glaciers grow and shrink. But the total quantity of water is unchanging. I just don't believe in a tripling or quadrupling of the total volume of water on earth followed shortly by the disappearance of all of that water.

For that matter, scientists estimate there are over 8.7 million different species of plants and animals on earth. Most of them living in specific distinct ecosystems scattered around the planet. Did Noah actually gather this many different species, 99.9% of which exist nowhere near the middle east? Did he zip around the world like Santa Claus in a magic flying ark, collecting polar bears from the Arctic, penguins from the Antarctic, pandas from China, anacondas from the Amazon, bison from North America, African elephants from the Serengeti, thousands of species of rain forest animals from Africa, Asia, and South America, along with all the foods those animals all required for 40 days? And then did he zip around the planet putting them all back where they belong? Or did they all just wander back home on their own across a devastated foodless earth from Mt Ararat and swim across oceans to their homes?

In any event, nearly identical flood stories appear in the ancient texts of other people's around the world. It is in the Epic of Gilgamesh. The ancient Greek god Deucalion, son of Poseidon, also built an ark and staffed it with creatures after being warned by Zeus, rode out a flood, and then relied on the advice of the Gods to repopulate the earth. Hindus have a flood legend in their ancient texts.

[MaxPC]

I believe it is 100% factual.

[DrWojo]

If you start out with a fictional reading of the Bible, when & how do you cut it off? But further, Jesus and others spoke of Noah and Abraham, even Adam, as though they were real historical figures. (I feel the same way about the story of Job, too.)

I heartily agree. And my next question is probably not one you take an issue with, but to your question, “when and how do you cut off a fictional reading of the Bible?” my counter is, Taking the same question in reverse, “If you start taking the end of the Bible as fictional, where is the ‘safe line’ to stop reading the Bible as figurative, just the Apocalyptic part of Revelation?”

[DrWojo]

I have no doubt that there have been massive floods over time. They happen to this day in some parts of the world.

But the "world" as understood by the ancient Israelites was tiny. The known world at the time of Noah was what? 500 or 1000 miles across? A flood covering most or all of those lands is conceivable.

But a flood that covered the entire world as we know it today with rain water in 40 days and 40 nights? The average elevation of the earth's continents is 2759 ft. So a flood that only covers half the earth's surface would require a layer of water covering the globe to a depth of 2759 ft. Without doing the math, that seems at least a doubling of the total volume of all the world's oceans. And that would still leave half the world's land mass dry. To fully cover the entire planet with water would require several more times the volume of all the world's oceans combined.

Rain water does not come from nowhere, it comes mostly from evaporation of the world's lakes and oceans. The total volume of water on earth is actually incredibly stable. Sea levels rise and fall over time as the world's ice caps and glaciers grow and shrink. But the total quantity of water is unchanging. I just don't believe in a tripling or quadrupling of the total volume of water on earth followed shortly by the disappearance of all of that water.

For that matter, scientists estimate there are over 8.7 million different species of plants and animals on earth. Most of them living in specific distinct ecosystems scattered around the planet. Did Noah actually gather this many different species, 99.9% of which exist nowhere near the middle east? Did he zip around the world like Santa Claus in a magic flying ark, collecting polar bears from the Arctic, penguins from the Antarctic, pandas from China, anacondas from the Amazon, bison from North America, African elephants from the Serengeti, thousands of species of rain forest animals from Africa, Asia, and South America, along with all the foods those animals all required for 40 days? And then did he zip around the planet putting them all back where they belong? Or did they all just wander back home on their own across a devastated foodless earth from Mt Ararat and swim across oceans to their homes?

In any event, nearly identical flood stories appear in the ancient texts of other people's around the world. It is in the Epic of Gilgamesh. The ancient Greek god Deucalion, son of Poseidon, also built an ark and staffed it with creatures after being warned by Zeus, rode out a flood, and then relied on the advice of the Gods to repopulate the earth. Hindus have a flood legend in their ancient texts.

So do you ignore scientific topics and concepts of microevolution, speciation and genetic drift in favor of Noah’s magic flying ark? In my opinion that takes more faith than simply believing they ‘went in according to God’s command.’

[Ken]

I have no doubt that there have been massive floods over time. They happen to this day in some parts of the world.

But the "world" as understood by the ancient Israelites was tiny. The known world at the time of Noah was what? 500 or 1000 miles across? A flood covering most or all of those lands is conceivable.

But a flood that covered the entire world as we know it today with rain water in 40 days and 40 nights? The average elevation of the earth's continents is 2759 ft. So a flood that only covers half the earth's surface would require a layer of water covering the globe to a depth of 2759 ft. Without doing the math, that seems at least a doubling of the total volume of all the world's oceans. And that would still leave half the world's land mass dry. To fully cover the entire planet with water would require several more times the volume of all the world's oceans combined.

Rain water does not come from nowhere, it comes mostly from evaporation of the world's lakes and oceans. The total volume of water on earth is actually incredibly stable. Sea levels rise and fall over time as the world's ice caps and glaciers grow and shrink. But the total quantity of water is unchanging. I just don't believe in a tripling or quadrupling of the total volume of water on earth followed shortly by the disappearance of all of that water.

For that matter, scientists estimate there are over 8.7 million different species of plants and animals on earth. Most of them living in specific distinct ecosystems scattered around the planet. Did Noah actually gather this many different species, 99.9% of which exist nowhere near the middle east? Did he zip around the world like Santa Claus in a magic flying ark, collecting polar bears from the Arctic, penguins from the Antarctic, pandas from China, anacondas from the Amazon, bison from North America, African elephants from the Serengeti, thousands of species of rain forest animals from Africa, Asia, and South America, along with all the foods those animals all required for 40 days? And then did he zip around the planet putting them all back where they belong? Or did they all just wander back home on their own across a devastated foodless earth from Mt Ararat and swim across oceans to their homes?

In any event, nearly identical flood stories appear in the ancient texts of other people's around the world. It is in the Epic of Gilgamesh. The ancient Greek god Deucalion, son of Poseidon, also built an ark and staffed it with creatures after being warned by Zeus, rode out a flood, and then relied on the advice of the Gods to repopulate the earth. Hindus have a flood legend in their ancient texts.

So do you ignore scientific topics and concepts of microevolution, speciation and genetic drift in favor of Noah’s magic flying ark? In my opinion that takes more faith than simply believing they ‘went in according to God’s command.’

I don't ignore any scientific topics. I just find it infinitely more plausible that the Bronze Age stories in the Pentateuch are like the other ancient origin stories that have been passed down from pre-modern civilizations. They represent the legends and beliefs and histories of a pre-modern people and not some literal scientific history of events that happened three millennia ago. Whether or not the earth flooded up to the 29,029 ft elevation of Mt. Everest with billions of cubic miles of magically appearing and then disappearing water, and Noah managed to gather up pairs of every species from every different habitat on earth, or whether it is just a historical pre-modern legend like every other from the Navajo to the Greeks, to the ancient Egyptians, really has no affect one way or the other on my faith.

I'm not trying to challenge anyone else's beliefs. Just explaining mine.

The Jewish Torah or Hebrew Bible has 24 books
The Protestant Old Testament has 39 books
The Catholic Old Testament has 46 books
The Orthodox Old Testament has 49 books.

Which one is right? Does it matter?

[Neto]

If you start out with a fictional reading of the Bible, when & how do you cut it off? But further, Jesus and others spoke of Noah and Abraham, even Adam, as though they were real historical figures. (I feel the same way about the story of Job, too.)

I heartily agree. And my next question is probably not one you take an issue with, but to your question, “when and how do you cut off a fictional reading of the Bible?” my counter is, Taking the same question in reverse, “If you start taking the end of the Bible as fictional, where is the ‘safe line’ to stop reading the Bible as figurative, just the Apocalyptic part of Revelation?”

You are correct - I do not take issue with your question, at least if I understand correctly. I am generally accused of taking the book of the Revelation too literally. But from the standpoint of linguistics (specifically discourse structure) - the style of writing, this book is said to follow the apocalyptic style used of Jewish "mystery writers", generally somewhat like fake prophets who wrote about past events, while claiming in their works to be some real prophet who lived in times before the events of which they wrote. I haven't studied this a great deal (as is probably evident), but as I understand, John, by making an outright claim right at the beginning that he was who he actually was (not some famous and respected prophet of the past) he sort of turned this genre of writing on its head, so to speak. So it is in some sense symbolic. But then again, I personally tend to take the symbolism pretty literally in application. (For instance, I accept that there shall be a literal person who will be THE AntiChrist, the culmination of all those who qualify for that title in lesser ways. I accept a literal 7-year - or greater - period of intense tribulation. I accept a literal reign on earth of the Christ of God.) (So now I have outed myself.)

[DrWojo]

I'm not trying to challenge anyone else's beliefs. Just explaining mine.

The Jewish Torah or Hebrew Bible has 24 books
The Protestant Old Testament has 39 books
The Catholic Old Testament has 46 books
The Orthodox Old Testament has 49 books.

Which one is right? Does it matter?

Which of those Bibles do you believe are God’s Word to you? Which, if any do you believe are God’s Word for you?