Was the World Created in 6 Days...?

[Totenkopf]

^^see post #41.

 

Face it. As soon as you allow an all-powerful diety into the picture, all the "normal" rules no longer apply.

[SkinWalker]

Given that the source for this "all powerful deity" is flawed and unreliable (the Noachian flood myth is clearly plagiarized from much earlier Sumerian myths), we can discount the inclusion of such a mythical being. Thus, according to Totenkopf, we can discount the entire thing, yes?

[Totenkopf]

First, you already do. Second, since God is an integral part of the whole Noah's Ark story, the acceptance of Noah's Ark is an implicit acceptance of God. Once that's done, then all the objections to the story can be "rationalized" awy. However, you're doing it backward. The impracticality of Noah's Ark doesn't mean the non-existence of God, but the non-existence of God would render the whole account of Noah's Ark (if one wanted to be a biblical literalist) as fanciful as you claim. Not arguing either way for the existence of God here, Skin. Merely pointing out that the only way the Noah's Ark story could work (not as as piece of fiction, btw) is with the implicit understanding that an all powerful diety exists. Naturally, if you discount God, it would rationally follow that Noah's Ark is merely an allegory.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Second, since God is an integral part of the whole Noah's Ark story, the acceptance of Noah's Ark is an implicit acceptance of God.

Well, technically, you could say God is a metaphor, that the Flood happened through other supernatural means, and that Noah and his family were still warned somehow.

 

If you can remove God from the creation of a universe, surely a tiny little world-devastating flood can't be too much ?

[Totenkopf]

Second, since God is an integral part of the whole Noah's Ark story, the acceptance of Noah's Ark is an implicit acceptance of God.

 

Well, technically, you could say God is a metaphor, that the Flood happened through other supernatural means, and that Noah and his family were still warned somehow.

 

If you can remove God from the creation of a universe, surely a tiny little world-devastating flood can't be too much ?

 

Not if you're looking at the Noah's Ark "myth" as being literal. Not sure what you're getting at with your last statement as it's implicit in my closing comment.

[Achilles]

Well, technically, you could say God is a metaphor, that the Flood happened through other supernatural means, and that Noah and his family were still warned somehow.

 

If you can remove God from the creation of a universe, surely a tiny little world-devastating flood can't be too much ?

Hey, DE, wouldn't the part that you quoted be false dichotomy?

 

Even if we were to find some supporting evidence for "Noah's flood", that isn't exactly evidence for god. It's evidence for a world-wide flood. Such evidence would similarly confirm dozens if not hundreds of other myths and act as "evidence" for those related deities as well.

[Totenkopf]

Hey, DE, wouldn't the part that you quoted be false dichotomy?

 

Even if we were to find some supporting evidence for "Noah's flood", that isn't exactly evidence for god. It's evidence for a world-wide flood. Such evidence would similarly confirm dozens if not hundreds of other myths and act as "evidence" for those related deities as well.

 

Nope. The statement isn't about whether a flood took place or not. It's about whether the literal biblical account re such a calamity is true. The literal biblical account has God telling Noah to build the ark and by what dimensions. If there is no diety, then the literal biblical account would be a different story altogether (likely nonexistent). Even if you found a ship approximating the dimensions in that account, it would be tenuous proof at best that the Ark story was true. More like that someone built a huge ship 5-6000 yrs ago for reasons not totally clear. This really isn't rocket science, guys.

 

The impracticality of Noah's Ark doesn't mean the non-existence of God, but the non-existence of God would render the whole account of Noah's Ark (if one wanted to be a biblical literalist) as fanciful as you claim.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Even if you found a ship approximating the dimensions in that account, it would be tenuous proof at best that the Ark story was true.

Not that you could build and maintain a ship like that. Wooden ships have an inherent limit to how big you can make them, and the amount of leakage and other problems the Ark would suffer from would be catastrophic, hugely adding to the chores Noah's family would have to undergo. If the ship floated at all.

[Totenkopf]

Not that you could build and maintain a ship like that. Wooden ships have an inherent limit to how big you can make them, and the amount of leakage and other problems the Ark would suffer from would be catastrophic, hugely adding to the chores Noah's family would have to undergo. If the ship floated at all.

 

W/o a God in the picture, that would likely be correct. Afterall, assuming a mere man like Noah decided on his own that he should build such a huge ship...what was his workforce? 3 sons or duaghters and their spouses? Thus my last quote in the previous post.

 

Also..

Not arguing either way for the existence of God here,