dagblog - Comments for "The Heretic's Bible - Genesis 8: The earth gets dry"

Someone asked the same

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:52:51 +0000

Someone asked the same question on Yahoo answers.

Here was the best answer:

well, there is a long tradition of sages claiming genesis is not a literal account of the creation of the world. this does not mean that all jews believe in evolution, etc. there are definitely many who believe in the creation story as being literal. but since judaism is action-based rather than faith-based, it doesn't matter if you believe it's literal or not - to put it simply nobody cares. i've talked to orthodox rabbis who even believed in creationism before and just said, "look, i think noah's ark and the tower of babel is all a bunch of hogwash." and their reaction is invariably, "that's fine, that's not important, it's good to question what you read. now tell me - what mitzvahs do you keep? do you keep the sabbath?" they brush off what you believe and focus immediately on what you do.

I'm aware of Christian

Nebton — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 14:41:42 +0000

In reply to See Orlando, this one thinks

I'm aware of Christian Creationists and Muslim Creationists, but I don't think I've heard of Jewish Creationists. Why is that? Do they need to work on their PR some, or is it just part of the "we're the chosen people, you're not, so why bother converting you?" logic?

Dinosaurs were killed in the

Orlando — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:59:03 +0000

In reply to See Orlando, this one thinks

Dinosaurs were killed in the flood, along with all other animals and humans that weren't on the ark. But according to my sources at the Creation Museum, when God said take 2 of every animal (or 7 pair--whatev), he didn't say, "Screw dino, though."

The reason that we didn't hear about dinosaurs after the flood is because they weren't called dinosaurs. The were called dragons (duh). And they're extinct now because people killed them off, either because they were scared of them or because they were showing off.

I. Am. Not. Making. This. Up.

There's a movie at the museum that explains it all.

See Orlando, this one thinks

Michael Wolraich — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 13:44:33 +0000

In reply to The Flood has often been

See Orlando, this one thinks that the dinosaurs were wiped out in the Flood.

I love how my heretic posts are bringing out the religious nutsoes. But where are the Jews? All we're getting are the Christians.

The Flood has often been

Anonymous — Thu, 11 Jun 2009 08:09:56 +0000

In reply to Thank very much for the link.

The Flood has often been regarded as a mere legend. Especially those people who believe in the theory of evolution do not believe that the Flood has ever taken place. It is impossible for them to think that it has ever occurred on Earth.

However, we should ask ourselves whether the Flood really took place. If we make practical observations based on what has been found in the ground, the fossils and traditional folklore, they quite often refer to the Flood. These indicate that a large mass destruction took place in the immediate past. The following paragraphs will deal with these different sources of information, referring to the Flood.

http://koti.phnet.fi/elohim/theflood.html

It's so uncool to play the

Michael Wolraich — Tue, 09 Jun 2009 04:02:24 +0000

In reply to Hard to believe you've become

It's so uncool to play the Nebton card.

Hard to believe you've become

quinn esq — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 23:07:49 +0000

In reply to The "sons of god" are pretty

Hard to believe you've become more ignorant, so-called Genghis. First off, there's loads of evidence about the nephilim. Scroll down for cool fossil pictures. 47" femurs baby.

http://bibleprobe.com/nephilim.htm

And secondly, you're going to Hell.

Plus Nebton.

'Nuff said.

For if "sons of God" is

Nebton — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:53:38 +0000

In reply to The "sons of god" are pretty

For if "sons of God" is metaphorical, then why not "6 days" and "flood" and "virgin" and all the rest?

For some reason, this made me think of Chris Farley's "motiviational speaker" skit on SNL.

The "sons of god" are pretty

Michael Wolraich — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 17:04:35 +0000

In reply to Actually, I assume that he's

The "sons of god" are pretty clearly contrasted with the "daughters of man," which suggests that whatever their origins, they are not human. Furthermore, the offspring of these interspecial couplings are referred to as nephilim, often translated as titans or giants.

Some interpret the "sons of god" to mean fallen angels. Others translate "sons of god" as "sons of nobles" and interpret it as a reference to the sons of Seth, in contrast to the sons of Cain.

But I think Joe the Heretic says it better than me: The Torah does not say, “fallen angels.” It says, “sons of God,” and surely God meant everything he said in the Torah. As crazedandconfused noted in a recent post, if you're a literalist, then reinterpreting the "word of God" in such a way as to make it more palatable is not an option. For if "sons of God" is metaphorical, then why not "6 days" and "flood" and "virgin" and all the rest?

Actually, I assume that he's

Nebton — Mon, 08 Jun 2009 15:33:52 +0000

In reply to I think that you're on the

Actually, I assume that he's suggesting that these "sons" weren't literally "sons" (presumably this means he doesn't support a literal translation of the Bible), but that they were merely "creations", or "sons" in the metaphorical sense. "God's children" have sex all the time, but God does not. Of course, someone got Mary pregnant, but that's many chapters from now.