Noah'S Flood

[CASteinman]

]First one would have to understand what gopher (Heb. gofer) wood really was. Since we are uncertain as to what exactly it meant means to add to the confusion. What we do know is that gofer wood is probably a mistranslation of the word gofer which ostensibly has its roots in Mesopotamia. From the Jewish Encyclopedia

We do not know that. Some people imagine it.

I take your answer as a covert: "No, there has been no engineering analysis" along with some excuses and speculation.

Therefore, the ark was actually made out of reeds which was and still used along the Tigris and Euphrates

That there are reeds along some places by the Tigris and Euphrates is virtually irrelevant to the building of the Ark.

.

the actual language of the time in which it was originally written, i.e., Sumerian.

So you imagine.

I notice your entire post borrows heavily out of the 1st book of Worldly Speculations.

Edited August 1, 2012 by CASteinman

[bcuzbcuz]

The vast evidence as seen in the geologic record testify of the flood. There is no dispute.

I know it's been covered before, but which evidence, do you think, is in the geologic record that verifies the flood? Global flood?

[bcuzbcuz]

Do you know anything about the physical characteristics of gopher wood or the manner of God's design and construction techniques? Anything at all?

No, of course I don't....and neither do you. I do know enough physics, on the other hand, to understand that the boat you are talking about could only stay afloat, even for less than a year, through an act of God.

Noah was not on a calm pond of water. Genesis 8:1 says God sent a wind over the earth. Wind and wooden ships of great length do not go together well. If Noah's ark was approximately 160 meters and encountered wavelengths of half the boat length, the ship would break apart from hogging or break apart in the trough of the waves from sagging. Even if Noah's ark was contained in a windless bubble, a global flood would have giant wave swells from gravitation. The ship would break apart.

Just because Noah (or whoever wrote the story) did not understand physics doesn't mean that physics didn't apply.

[bcuzbcuz]

......but just to be fair, if the whole ark were made of wood, and there were no metal parts, wouldn't it float anyway, even if it were filled with water, simply because wood floats unless weighed down by something heavier? Not that a flooded wooden ship would make it any easier for you to save your mythical land animals from drowning.

This coming week I will be taking my granddaughter to the Wasa museum in Stockholm. The Wasa was a wooden vessel, with iron bolts, built to be the pride of the King of Sweden. It had, among other things, 60 carvings of male lions along with 300 other sculptures, all in wood, of course.

The boat was constructed with the finest oak, with sides over 60 cm's thick. This magnificent boat was 69 meters long, but top heavy. It was launched in the Stockholm harbor in 1628 and sank like a rock the same day.

The boat was rediscovered in the late 1950's, salvaged, floated and restored. It would still sink like a rock if it were returned to float under it's own sails.

Even though it is a wooden ship, it comes down to physics of weight vs displacement.

[Ron Beron]

I notice your entire post borrows heavily out of the 1st book of Worldly Speculations.

I assume you also believe in talking asses as well. Since the Bible is not a textbook on scientific design we can only go on speculation and modern day research. You seem to espouse a faith only approach when it is certainly not the only approach to the Bible. Why continue to assume that that there was a Noah? A football field sized ark? A contingent of animals grouped two by two or seven by seven? Given the absence of any actual construction techniques and barring the technological expertise of extraterrestrial influence then we can only depend on the Bible and the actual techniques available at the time, hence, reeds or planed wood.

6:14 Make for yourself an ark of cypress (or cedar0wood (A transliteration of the Hebrew term yields “gopher (גֹּפֶר, gofer) wood” (so KJV, NAB, NASB). While the exact nature of the wood involved is uncertain (cf. NLT “resinous wood”), many modern translations render the Hebrew term as “cypress” (so NEB, NIV, NRSV) NET Bible.. Make rooms in the ark, and coverit with pitch inside and out.

6:15 This is how you should make it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide, and 45 feet high.

6:16 Make a roof for the ark and finish it, leaving 18 inches from the top.Put a door in the side of the ark, and make lower, middle, and upper decks.

Where's the specificity? Did the ark have a single spar running the length? Did it use tongue and groove or was it bound by strapping? To answer these questions you have to look at the naval architecture of the time. Given the paucity of info given by God you can only assume that Noah built the ark according to his own understanding. BTW, what did he do with all the animal poop?

For a fuller understanding Mesopotamian boat building see here.... http://nautarch.tamu.edu/pdf-files/Makela-MA2002.pdf

[Ron Beron]

This coming week I will be taking my granddaughter to the Wasa museum in Stockholm. The Wasa was a wooden vessel, with iron bolts, built to be the pride of the King of Sweden. It had, among other things, 60 carvings of male lions along with 300 other sculptures, all in wood, of course.

The boat was constructed with the finest oak, with sides over 60 cm's thick. This magnificent boat was 69 meters long, but top heavy. It was launched in the Stockholm harbor in 1628 and sank like a rock the same day.

The boat was rediscovered in the late 1950's, salvaged, floated and restored. It would still sink like a rock if it were returned to float under it's own sails.

Even though it is a wooden ship, it comes down to physics of weight vs displacement.

I love this story. I can only imagine the shock of those who gathered on the wharf only to see this incredibly ornate sailing vessel sink beneath the waves.

[Ron Beron]

So you imagine.

I notice your entire post borrows heavily out of the 1st book of Worldly Speculations.

You are familiar with the story of Gilgamesh, aren't you? Since it was written over a thousand years before the Ark story and includes the adventures of a man (Utnapishtim) who was told by Ea to build a vessel to avoid an upcoming flood. Sound familiar? Sumerian.

[CASteinman]

I assume you also believe in talking asses as well.

Well, you know what Assuming does for you, right? I am not the one making assumptions.

Since the Bible is not a textbook on scientific design we can only go on speculation and modern day research.

That is incorrect. There are other things we can go on. For example, we can go on this: We don't have a clue.

Is it really so hard to admit that?

[CASteinman]

You are familiar with the story of Gilgamesh, aren't you? Since it was written over a thousand years before the Ark story and includes the adventures of a man (Utnapishtim) who was told by Ea to build a vessel to avoid an upcoming flood. Sound familiar? Sumerian.

If it was written before the Ark story then they are not the same and so it is irrelevant. If it is the same story then apparently it is shared across many cultures including Sumerian -- who may well not have had it first.

Again... you seem to just thrill to speculate contrary to the teachings of Apostles and the Lord Jesus Christ.

This last statement crosses a line. Don't do it again.

[CASteinman]

No, of course I don't....and neither do you.

But the difference between us.. is that until now, I have been the only one saying that we do not know... and now, even after you say it, you blunder forward pretending that you do know -- despite this admission.

Meanwhile I continue to assert -- that YOU DO NOT KNOW, despite your imaginations below.

I do know enough physics, on the other hand, to understand that the boat you are talking about could only stay afloat, even for less than a year, through an act of God.

So now, apparently, its a matter of your personal expertise in physics.

What are your degrees in physics? How many papers have you written on the physical properties of gopher wood? How many papers have you written on the physical qualities of the specific construction technique for the Ark? Where, for example, did you obtain your data on whether the materials were composites or laminates, how many fasteners were used, in what configuration and what type? Where did you obtain your data on whether the boat had a keel or not? Where did you get your technical data package on the thickness and construction process for the hull? Was it multi-hull or single hull? Was it composed of laminar materials assembled in geometric self correcting spring patterns? What was the role of the internal construction in holding the ship together? Was it a modular construction that flexed rather than rigid?

How do you know?

Or, if you do not know any of this stuff -- how were you able to conduct your professional physics determinations?

Wind and wooden ships of great length do not go together well. If Noah's ark was approximately 160 meters and encountered wavelengths of half the boat length, the ship would break apart from hogging or break apart in the trough of the waves from sagging.

You imagine. You do not know. You have absolutely no information that can support this claim because you do not know the physical properties of gopher wood nor do you know how the boat was constructed. What if Gopher Wood is stronger than Iron? Can you prove it is not? How do you know?

If I follow your logic then timely answers to prayers are virtually impossible and science has proved it. Its an agnostic view and contrary to the teachings of the Prophets and Apostles.

Edited August 1, 2012 by CASteinman

[Ron Beron]

CASteinman'

Well, you know what Assuming does for you, right? I am not the one making assumptions.

I was referring to Balaams ***.

That is incorrect. There are other things we can go on. For example, we can go on this: We don't have a clue.

Is it really so hard to admit that?

The "clues", if you want to call them that, are in the contextual history and language of both the Bible and the cultures surrounding it. No clues, just facts.

[Ron Beron]

If it was written before the Ark story then they are not the same and so it is irrelevant. If it is the same story then apparently it is shared across many cultures including Sumerian -- who may well not have had it first.

Again... you seem to just thrill to speculate contrary to the teachings of Apostles and the Lord Jesus Christ.

Gilgamesh was written millenia before the bible was a direct influence of it. Sumerians were the first to write it down since there weren't a Hebrew people at the time far less the ability to write about. Additionally, Noah aka Utnapishtim aka Ziusudra et al, wasn't Hebrew or Jewish nor believed in a single deity.

[CASteinman]

the contextual history and language of both the Bible and the cultures surrounding it. No clues, just facts.

Pretty much irrelevant.

[CASteinman]

Gilgamesh was written millenia before the bible was a direct influence of it.

So you imagine. How do you know that Noah did not influence both stories? How do you know?

Sumerians were the first to write it down since there weren't a Hebrew people at the time far less the ability to write about.

Your imaginary speculation that there were no Hebrew people is not a valid observation.

Additionally, Noah aka Utnapishtim aka Ziusudra et al, wasn't Hebrew or Jewish nor believed in a single deity.

He specifically believed in and taught the people to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.

[Ron Beron]

'CASteinman'

So you imagine. How do you know that Noah did not influence both stories? How do you know?

Because the Sumerian story is from cuneiform which is datable to thousands of years before the account of Noah. Even if you discount the Documentary Hypothesis and allow only for Moses' writing of Genesis then you will have to ask yourself where Moses got the info since he lived post-Gilgamesh.

Your imaginary speculation that there were no Hebrew people is not a valid observation.

Really? There isn't a discernible people called Hebrew unless we look at proto-Israelites peoples and what might have been named Habiru, Hyksos, or Shasu.

He specifically believed in and taught the people to repent and believe in Jesus Christ.

Where do you find this?

[bcuzbcuz]

If I follow your logic then timely answers to prayers are virtually impossible and science has proved it. Its an agnostic view and contrary to the teachings of the Prophets and Apostles.

Although you propitiously avoid using the word 'assume' your conclusion makes several assumptions that are incorrect. First of all, my statements and written comments make no mention of prayer. Someone here quite correctly has stated that prayer does not play a role in determining whether or not Noah's flood is actual or allegorical. Secondly, I am not an agnostic, nor do I hold agnostic views.

You also make a number of assumptions about how technology is passed on (or not passed on, as the case may be) that seem to lack any reference points. If Noah and his sons and family were the only surviving humans on the earth then the cultures that sprang from their loins would inherit their base of knowledge. Whatever construction means employed by Noah would be learned by Noah's sons....and Noah, of course....who did not die immediately after the flood (According to the OT he lived for an additional 300 years).

Prior to the flood the Egyptians hauled enormous blocks of rock on their river barges for the construction of their pyramids and temples. After the flood they continued to haul even more enormous blocks of rock on barges that had the same level of boat and barge technology. If all the newer generation Egyptians sprang from the loins of Noah, why did they go back to doing things in the same way and not take advantage of their newly obtained, and far superior, methods of boat construction?

I'm not expecting you to get an answer in prayer to this conundrum, just follow a path of logic.

In fact, if Noah used an advanced technology to build the ark, we find no evidence of such technology anywhere from later boat construction. There was no giant leap forward in construction techniques. That presupposes that Noah was given a technology then asked to stop using it. Do you have any evidence of such a commandment? "Now! Don't do it again!" (Life of Brian)

Is logic contrary to the teachings of the Prophets and Apostles?

Edited August 2, 2012 by bcuzbcuz

[CASteinman]

Although you propitiously avoid using the word 'assume' your conclusion makes several assumptions that are incorrect. First of all, my statements and written comments make no mention of prayer.

They don't have to mention prayer. My comment was about your logic. Not about prayer per se. Prayer is merely another example.

Someone here quite correctly has stated that prayer does not play a role in determining whether or not Noah's flood is actual or allegorical.

That is irrelevant to the point.

Secondly, I am not an agnostic, nor do I hold agnostic views.

What is the correct term for someone who believes that God cannot teach man to do unusual things because science says they are physically impractical or impossible? I'm not sure.

You also make a number of assumptions about how technology is passed on (or not passed on, as the case may be) that seem to lack any reference points.

Utter nonsense. I have made no such assumption. I have not said that Noah had any technology at all. I have not even said that surely there actually was a Noah. (Although to clarify -- I do believe that there was such a person -- I am just pointing out that I have not expressed any such assumptions.)

Egyptians sprang from the loins of Noah, why did they go back to doing things in the same way and not take advantage of their newly obtained, and far superior, methods of boat construction?

Why did Lamanites become naked savages?

I'm not expecting you to get an answer in prayer to this conundrum, just follow a path of logic.

Logic instead of prayer. Does that not sound a bit agnostic regarding religion and a bit worshipful of the mind of man?

Is logic contrary to the teachings of the Prophets and Apostles?

Sometimes, yes.

You seem to be under the impression that, like you, I have a specific theory about Noah. I don't. I have said this many times and many different ways. What I am opposed to is a sense of certitude in speculation about things that we do not have any knowledge and where that speculation is that God is somehow powerless or that certain aspects of the story of Noah did not happen -- because we have the account of Enoch as found in the Book of Moses to confirm a few things to us.

[bcuzbcuz]

Utter nonsense. I have made no such assumption. I have not said that Noah had any technology at all. I have not even said that surely there actually was a Noah. (Although to clarify -- I do believe that there was such a person -- I am just pointing out that I have not expressed any such assumptions.)

You are quite right. I will make conclusions only upon what you say and ask for clarification if I think you are implying. I don't doubt there was a Noah, either. I do, however, not think that he lived 950 or so years and that all future generations came from his loins. There is absolutely nothing more than scripture to verify his living so long and absolutely no physical evidence that any human has ever lived that long. Furthermore, the genetic evidence does not confirm that there was a genetic bottleneck around 4500 years ago, either in human development or of other animals.

Why did Lamanites become naked savages?

The Lamanites never did become savages, and certainly not naked...with the exception of the Yahgan natives of Tierra del Fuega at the tip of South America. Societies do, however, decline into less technological ages but never without leaving traces of their past.

Logic instead of prayer. Does that not sound a bit agnostic regarding religion and a bit worshipful of the mind of man?

You got me there. Although I do insist that my reference to logic, instead of prayer, is that I think we have the ability to think logically and should use it. We can suspend our logic when we choose to believe in fiction, or stories told to us by others and we can even defy our logic to follow a path we've chosen, based on other realities. But logic steers us in a great deal of our daily living and is not our enemy. I don't think logic steers me, for example, in matters of the heart. I can fall in and out of love and experience has taught me that my logic seems to have nothing to do with it. But, in matters of the heart, if I was repeatedly lied to and treated unhonorably I would allow logic to make my choices.

You seem to be under the impression that, like you, I have a specific theory about Noah. I don't. I have said this many times and many different ways. What I am opposed to is a sense of certitude in speculation about things that we do not have any knowledge and where that speculation is that God is somehow powerless or that certain aspects of the story of Noah did not happen -- because we have the account of Enoch as found in the Book of Moses to confirm a few things to us.

Many, many years ago, when I worked with a native tribe in the far north of Canada I was treated to some stories that fascinated me about the culture clashes between European society and the native people there. The first Europeans there were either trappers or missionary monks. One such munk set about to write the history and stories of the natives there. He had learned the local language and all the local dialects and travelled from village to village, preaching and collecting stories. The natives found the monk to be educated and friendly but overwhelmingly naive. He bought any story they told him, no matter how outrageous.

He faithfully wrote all the stories down so we have them preserved in book form. One such story was that the local women had breasts so over-dimensioned that they cold carry their babies on their back and still feed them by slinging a breast over their shoulder. Virgin that he was, he believed every single word and of course never thought to check to see if the story was true.

When he bought that one, they told him how they hunted. When the caribou migrated, he was told, they are the most vulnerable when crossing a river. The natives would paddle out in to mid-stream, then jump from their boat on to the reindeers back and slit the animals throat before it could escape. Again he never checked or questioned this hunting method, he just wrote it down. This story, by the way, has appeared in modern texts, each referencing back to the monk's carefully noted tales.

The people who were noted as the authors of these tales, the Sekanni and Dog, laugh at the gullibility of the recorder. Slit a reindeer's throat mid-stream and it will sink.

Why is this significant? Check Noah's tale with an investigative eye. Question the details, search for physical proof, or lacking that, try to think critically. Do we have any evidence that a man could live 950 years? Is it possible that the whole earth could be flooded to cover each and every mountain? Is it possible to build an ark capable of carrying 2 or 7 of every animal on the earth? Does genetic evidence support a population bottleneck around 4500 years ago? Did rainbows only come into existence 4500 years ago and that light could not be refracted before that time?

Or were the story tellers just pulling our collective leg?

[CASteinman]

You are quite right. I will make conclusions only upon what you say and ask for clarification if I think you are implying. I don't doubt there was a Noah, either. I do, however, not think that he lived 950 or so years and that all future generations came from his loins.

I have no problem with anyone thinking that. However, I have a bit of a problem with someone asserting that this is known to be true -- because it is contrary to revelations given to Joseph Smith -- which I also believe.

There is absolutely nothing more than scripture to verify his living so long and absolutely no physical evidence that any human has ever lived that long.

There is also nothing but scripture to verify his existence. Yet you believe in his existence. Perhaps you pick and choose.

Furthermore, the genetic evidence does not confirm that there was a genetic bottleneck around 4500 years ago, either in human development or of other animals.

Well, assuming that science can detect such things.

The Lamanites never did become savages, and certainly not naked...

According to the Book of Mormon, they did. But that may be one more scripture you do not really accept.

I do insist that my reference to logic, instead of prayer, is that I think we have the ability to think logically and should use it.

As I said this is a sort of agnostic approach.

The natives found the monk to be educated and friendly but overwhelmingly naive. He bought any story they told him, no matter how outrageous. He faithfully wrote all the stories down so we have them preserved in book form. One such story was that the local women had breasts so over-dimensioned that they cold carry their babies on their back and still feed them by slinging a breast over their shoulder. Virgin that he was, he believed every single word and of course never thought to check to see if the story was true.

How well have you checked to determine that this story is true?

The people who were noted as the authors of these tales, the Sekanni and Dog, laugh at the gullibility of the recorder. Slit a reindeer's throat mid-stream and it will sink.

So they tried it out to see? Hmmmm.

Why is this significant? Check Noah's tale with an investigative eye. Question the details, search for physical proof, or lacking that, try to think critically. Do we have any evidence that a man could live 950 years? Is it possible that the whole earth could be flooded to cover each and every mountain? Is it possible to build an ark capable of carrying 2 or 7 of every animal on the earth? Does genetic evidence support a population bottleneck around 4500 years ago? Did rainbows only come into existence 4500 years ago and that light could not be refracted before that time?

As I said, your perspective is directly contrary to the teachings of the Prophet Joseph Smith. Yet you claim to believe he was a true prophet. Does that strike you as logical?

Do you feel that you are superior to others who have logical lapses -- but lapses not more serious than yours?

[Ron Beron]

CASteinman, why do you have to come across as uber confrontational? You are among fellow Mormons most of whom are in good standing. We are here to discuss Noah and the many theories about him and the flood not to debate to the death the truth of the gospel. :::sigh:::

[Calm]

One such story was that the local women had breasts so over-dimensioned that they cold carry their babies on their back and still feed them by slinging a breast over their shoulder. Virgin that he was, he believed every single word and of course never thought to check to see if the story was true.

I've actually heard that one, too funny.

[bcuzbcuz]

How well have you checked to determine that this story is true?

So they tried it out to see? Hmmmm.

In both these cases I am satisfied to rely on the fact that the local native tribes still find these stories exceedingly humorous and love to repeat them over and over. A good story and a good story teller is highly prized around a campfire or while sitting next to a stove in the winter.

[rodheadlee]

. BTW, what did he do with all the animal poop?

Put it in biodegradable paper bags and tossed it overboard?

[djholmess]

No, of course I don't....and neither do you. I do know enough physics, on the other hand, to understand that the boat you are talking about could only stay afloat, even for less than a year, through an act of God.

Noah was not on a calm pond of water. Genesis 8:1 says God sent a wind over the earth. Wind and wooden ships of great length do not go together well. If Noah's ark was approximately 160 meters and encountered wavelengths of half the boat length, the ship would break apart from hogging or break apart in the trough of the waves from sagging. Even if Noah's ark was contained in a windless bubble, a global flood would have giant wave swells from gravitation. The ship would break apart.

Just because Noah (or whoever wrote the story) did not understand physics doesn't mean that physics didn't apply.

Regarding the physics check out this link

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/tj/v8/n1/noah

And for an interesting article about other large wooden ships this one

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/cm/v22/n3/ships

[Ron Beron]

Regarding the physics check out this link

http://www.answersin...s/tj/v8/n1/noah

And for an interesting article about other large wooden ships this one

http://www.answersin...cm/v22/n3/ships

This was also interesting... http://www.mlahanas.de/Greeks/GiantShips.htm

The difference between Hellenistic ships and the ark of Noah is about 2000 years of naval architecture. It would be like the USS Nimitz floating around the 1st century Mediterranean.