so if i am only familiar with my backyard, and my entire backyard floods, then it is true to claim the world flooded because my backyard is the world to me? also i just talked to the world ender people on the street and they say that the thing starts in new zealand and doesnt make it new york until 6 pm.
OK, let's say you just did that. Now everyone on Tiger Forums can take pictures of their backyards and post them and say, "Hey numbskull, there's more of the world than just your backyard!" But the authors of Genesis didn't have an internet on which to post their book. So the Aztecs or Cherokees or whoever didn't know to send them evidence that there was more of the world than they thought. They wrote in the context of the world as they knew it, which was almost unfathomly different from the world we know. Is that so difficult to understand?
not difficult to understand at all. also not true. and even if true still would be pointing out that they are incompetent to report a flood of the world when they only know a small area. besides, who is supposedly reporting? noah? isnt everyone else drowned?
That's like saying the Wright Brothers were incompetent because they built the Flyer instead of space shuttle Endeavor. Not getting what you're trying to say here.
did they claim they made a spaceship? no. i am saying your point is stupid. you are saying there is historical evidence for a worldwide flood because the wuthors were morons and think a small flood is actual a worldwide flood, so all that is required is a small flood. thats stupid. and also that makes me wonder who is reporting this flood if not noah, because everyone else is drowned
Actually the article cites a bunch of local evidence of flooding but cannot tie them all together. That has always been the second of two major issues. None of the evidence matches corresponding evidence in other areas. The primary sticking point remains . . . there ain't enough water on the planet to completely cover it and never was. It did if you take the authors at their word. Now you are talking. The flood story did not enter the Hebrew Scriptures until after the Mesopotamian exile where the Hebrews spent 70 years immersed in the religions of Babylon which had an existing Great Flood story documented on clay tablets. Clearly in Iraq between the Tigris and Euphrates river there have been huge floods that covered the entire riverine lowlands. But . . . there is no possible way for a Mesopotamian alluvial flood event to transport an ark to the Turkish Mountains. Somewhere along the line two stories have been conflated into one and later embellished into a worldwide flood.
Your point is stupid. You are trying to hold people who lived thousands of years ago to the standards of 21st century knowledge and experience.
A regular army surplus machete works fine for me. But in South America they make a big honkin' machete for Amazon jungle work. I probably ain't man enough to swing it for long anymore but I've always coveted one.
is your point that there wasnt really a global flood? just a small flood seen by some folks who thought it was global? well then who saw it? noah and his animals?
Genesis doesn't say where the ark landed. But your point about two stories being combined, and embellished, is valid. My education is Catholic school from kindergarten through high school, and the Jesuits in college. I was taught in Catholic high school religion class that the stories of the Bible are not meant to be taken literally.
