I find the story of The Flood is the one that fits the over all Biblical narraitve the least!
The Biblical version of the Sumerian story seems to be all about “Hebrew-izing” a foreign story … not about telling a more accurate version.
Your response would better suit a thread on whether or not Noah’s flood actually happened. I am primarily looking for people who believe in Noah’s flood to give input, as my initial post clearly assumes that a potential responder takes my position partially seriously.
1 Like
I can understand your perspective. I thought I would chime in so that people understand that the Flood story is not a mandatory inclusion in canonical Christianity.
It is true that belief in Noah’s Flood is not in any Christian creed, but I think it’s important we don’t reduce the Bible to Hebrew-izing of pagan stories. If this is really the case then the Biblical authors are being quite dishonest.
They could have been hebriacizing pagan stories that were true in important ways. If Noah’s flood was real, the pagan stories could have been referring to it.
I prefer to look at it as: the pagan stories and Hebrew stories were describing the same events, but from different traditions.
If. Is there any reason to believe any of these stories are historically true? Is there any need for Christians to believe it, even absent evidence? Why go through an unnecessary exercise in wishful thinking?
1 Like
Well, there are a large number of flood myths around the globe. Many people, for entirely secular reasons, think there was a lot of flooding that inspired these converging myths.
It is not wishful thinking to believe that an event recorded and believed across dozens of cultures and civilizations is real!
Why has this thread already turned into a debate about the historicity of Noah’s flood? I’ll say it again: I was asking for people who believe in Noah’s flood to give input, not people who want to disprove it!
If I was trying to have a dialogue about evolution it would be extremely obnoxious if a YEC came in and told me evolution was wrong the entire time.
I see you’ve never observed any of the hundreds of threads on evolution here. 
3 Likes
@Ur-Namma, for now just ignore those posts. @moderators can split the thread.
I have, and its quite obnoxious to see the YEC’s pocking their heads into every conversation involving evolution.
There are very few Pro-Evolution Christians who feel strongly enough about the Flood story that they think it must be true.
The people that are MOST inclined to think the Flood story can be pinpointed historically are those who emphatically reject Evolutionary processes in most discussions.
Perhaps the Old Earth Creationists are the ones most interested in defending the historicity of the Biblical Flood? Are you an Old Earther, Jack Naylor?
On BioLogos I answered that question for you @gbrooks9; I am not an Old Earther. Apparently people who actually take the Bible as divinely inspired and reliable, and believe in evolution are an extreme minority.
How do your beliefs differ from Old Earth Creationists?
If you could recall our conversations on “Establishing Biblical Chronology”, you would know.
1 Like
That’s quite ambiguous in many ways. Who are these “many people”? What are their “secular reasons”? And what does “a lot of flooding” mean?
There are of course all manner of myths around the world, and some of them are about floods. And a great many floods have happened in many places. I was there for the great Mississippi River flood of 1993, for example. But there’s no reason to suppose that any of these legends was inspired by a particular flood rather than by floods in general, and certainly no reason to suppose that all of them were inspired by the same flood. And there’s no reason to suppose that the biblical flood was a real event or that the story is true in any of its details, not even a “secular reason”.
If it isn’t essential for Christianity, why should you care?
2 Likes
I do find the idea that “whether the flood happened” is a question distinct from the details of “how and when it happened” is downright strange. Any hypothesis about the latter might be rejected, and if all hypotheses about the latter fail to stand up, one is left with the former question. The questions are not distinct from one another. Similarly, one of the answers to the question “what are the gods like?” is “nonexistent.” It’s not as though that answer is nonresponsive; it’s very much to the point.
3 Likes
What was your profile name at BioLogos?