The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Is there a God? If so, what is She like?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Sculptor
Posts: 4366
Joined: Wed Jun 26, 2019 11:32 pm

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Sculptor »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:01 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 5:11 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 4:17 pm

The pronoun ''People'' is a belief.
A belief, is not the same as ''direct experience''.

Flooding is not imagined, flooding is a natural event that can be directly experienced. The Ark story is a metaphor for self- preservation.
I think you are clinically insane.
:lol:

You're welcome to your belief, but it's not my direct experience here. 8)
Im only a figment of your imagination
Age
Posts: 8972
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Age »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 2:28 pm
Age wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 1:46 pm
Because what was being talked about NEEDED to be CLEANSED and the best way to do this is water and flushing it CLEAN, AGAIN. Contrary to popular BELIEF the words of the bible are NOT all written in literal language.

Well we all know that BELIEFS are just artificially superimposed ideas upon reality that has no idea or belief about itself. In fact there is no reality except a human interpretation of one.

Reality just is, it doesn't require a copy of itself in the form of an invisible interpretation or belief.
Okay, but what has ANY of this got to do with what I ACTUALLY said and wrote here?
Dontaskme
Posts: 11404
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Dontaskme »

Sculptor wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 9:59 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:01 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 5:11 pm

I think you are clinically insane.
:lol:

You're welcome to your belief, but it's not my direct experience here. 8)
Im only a figment of your imagination
The 'you' is only interacting with itself alone, in the form of an image, in what is fundamentally imageless.

The 'belief' that the image is real, is always imagined.

.
User avatar
vegetariantaxidermy
Posts: 10505
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2012 6:45 am
Location: Narniabiznus

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by vegetariantaxidermy »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:01 pm
Sculptor wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 5:11 pm
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 4:17 pm

The pronoun ''People'' is a belief.
A belief, is not the same as ''direct experience''.

Flooding is not imagined, flooding is a natural event that can be directly experienced. The Ark story is a metaphor for self- preservation.
I think you are clinically insane.
:lol:

You're welcome to your belief, but it's not my direct experience here. 8)

Mind your beliefs don't come a reality for you, imagine living among clinically insane people, I'm assuming you are a person who believes there are other people who are clinically insane, I mean imagine what kind of reality that must be like for you, having to live among clinically insane people, or even saying to your wife, hey babe, lets make-out tonight, so that we can invite more insane people to come and join all the other insane people, because we just really love the idea of having a huge insane party of insane people. :roll:

You are talking to a complete stranger on the internet you know nothing about or have ever met, and yet here you are believing this person you know nothing about or have ever met, is clinically insane, is that because my philosophy is not your philosophy, so it's just easier to call my philosophy insane. Are you insane too, or is your philosophy the sane type, but mine is just the insane type.

Oh my god ....I just can't.... :lol: :lol:
Is your mind not telling your fingers what to type?



Image
Dontaskme
Posts: 11404
Joined: Sat Mar 12, 2016 2:07 pm

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Dontaskme »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Mon Nov 22, 2021 11:44 am
Is your mind not telling your fingers what to type?


I have no idea who or what is working as and through me. I can only imagine I know. 8)

Observing, shows natures luring trick of self-deception, in that she's nothing more than a crude vicious serial killer, nothing more than a venus fly trap.

Check out God's beautiful gift to you in the following video... ( sarcasm :wink: )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3bzyVHElwAM

Religious stories are just (pure fluff) to soothe away the stark reality that is natures blood and gore fest.


"If Noah had had the gift of reading the future, surely he would have sunk his boat." ~Emile Cioran
Belinda
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Belinda »

Scott Mayers wrote:
Because the myth was a secondary event in which God thought to destroy the world and restart again, the odd way the myth evolved suggests that they had to have had prior knowledge of fossil evidence of ancient beings, including dinosaurs, which led them to derive a 'story' that theorized how and why these fossils existed.
But whether they had or had not prior knowledge of ancient beings, that knowledge would be insufficient for the creation and establishment of an important myth. Farmers have little time and energy for academic speculations.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2247
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Scott Mayers »

Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 8:19 am
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 17, 2021 1:00 am
What do you think?
I do not really know what your OP is asking for in regards to understanding, so I cannot comment on that.
Belinda wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 1:02 pm I don't believe the argument from fossil evidence because it's more likely that fertile areas were flood plains where floods were regular events.
It's the nature of a myth to be a narrative about a particular event which signifies a regular or constant event.
It is also the nature of human intelligence that myths narrate a particular story about one man's values that should be all men's values. Noah's Flood is an example of both these characteristics of myth.
I am asserting that I believe the ancients who found fossil remains of beings that no longer exist needed this highly unusual type of flood story to describe why they existed but no longer do. This type of myth doesn't concern the destruction of water creatures given floods don't affect them and of the rest, most fossilized beings were at odds with the animals that they knew existed to them.

Although some flood myths could exist by normal flooding, the Deluge types that have the god(s) kill off the whole world populations of people (or gods) to restart again seems to be odd for me given its unusual characteristics that seem like they shouldn't be independently created so similarly. The Judeo-Christianity, the Epic of Gilgamesh, and from the earliest records of this, the Akkadian Atra-hasis have a unique structural form that particularly seems only valid if they knew that the world had a prior state of beings that no longer existed.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2247
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Scott Mayers »

Age wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 1:43 pm
Whenever one begins a so-called 'argument' with, "Because the 'myth' ...", BEFORE it has been PROVEN that 'it' is an ACTUAL 'myth', then what you are going to do is just get the ones who ALREADY BELIEVE that 'it' is a 'myth', like you do, LISTEN to you, and the ones who do NOT believe that 'it' is a 'myth' NOT LISTEN to you.
Yes, I assumed this a myth as you and others should know by now that I'm atheist. If one is religious, would you be surprised if they simply begun a thread by assuming a default of truth to their particular scripture's story?

This discussion presumes apriori no religion, a position that is the LEAST biased and one in which any animal born with the likeness of intellectual reflection would require being taught by some religion of their environment.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2247
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Scott Mayers »

uwot wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 2:23 pm My favourite explanation for the Noah's flood myth is the Black Sea deluge hypothesis. I think you might prefer Adrienne Mayor's take in 'The First Fossil Hunters'.
I agree that the Black Sea's deluge may have value of general flood myths but it wouldn't defend how the same kind of deluge involving the whole world would and all animals everywhere. I saw Adrienne Mayor's name on the Wikipedia entry for "Flood myth" but cannot comment on her arguments. I will have to look at that source but do not need sourcing for this other than our imaginations of how the world would be like if we were there in the most charitable of interpretations.

All of my religious related theories or speculation derives from my assumption that all religions originate from actual reality that only devolved into myths and misinterpretation through time. The majority of people prior to the last few centuries were not literal readers and had to rely on memory, entertaining stories, or to any pre-established 'authenicating' sources as accepted by political powers affecting culture. As such, I proposed other theories/speculation, like the origin of temples and sacrifices similarly.

As for the Noah's Ark variation that involves destroying the whole world's population, this flood story is a second stage type of explanation assuming a prior world that was different before. Given floods are not assumed to kill off water-based animals and assuming the people back then were not ALL idiots, it would be a clever justification in light of COLLECTIVE societies of differing backgrounds in places where people meet, such as the Middle East or India. When formally writing them down, they would have already contained a lot of religious sounding content because the norm of learning anything required mnemonic devices that best gets passed on through entertainment and exaggeration of significant key things.

The names also had signficance and my have acted as Rosetta-like stones for various cultures. As such, the "Noah" likely had some common generic meaning and thus the lessons also taught about languages as well as real 'scientific' knowledge shared in common to most diverse groups of people. [Maybe "Noah" comes from a word meaning "new" for instance(?)]

The Greeks had their Titans as did many religions. This suggests the link to dinosaurs and other strange but structurally related beings to humans that would be spread from far reaches. The news of such would not be trivial news and so in such 'meeting' places as the early cities of the Middle East would be known even if some never directly witnessed the evidence. I imagine it would be so absurdly interesting that those discovering such fossils would also likley bring samples where possible (most of which likely no longer exist if highly valued). I believe we falsely interpret archeology and other scientific wisdom as recent and arrogantly dismiss the ancients as utilizing religion irrationally like those extreme cults of today. No doubt that religions that exist now would contribute strongly to ridiculing the ancients like this. You can't find too many professionals in Egyptology, for instance, who wouldn't read into everything regarding the apparent records of the ancients as always speaking about 'gods'! To me this is absurd. You cannot expect a society without very powerful weapons to maintain a cult of such broad scope of power.

I argue by assuming the times and what it would be like if I were there, being sure to try to include as many foundational factors from all different aspects of life. In this way, the Noah's ark story would be rational giving charity to the past people as equally credible as people today. AND, I don't trust relying on interpreting the mythologizing as any different than how we entertain ourselves in audio or visual art creations we find more powerful when they can tie our emotions to secular reality. The ancients had to rely more on making everything cartoonish or it would not get passed on. The originators of these stories and their expected audiences who were mature would be more skeptical of other people's myths unless they were understood not to be literal and had a shareable common theme.
Scott Mayers
Posts: 2247
Joined: Wed Jul 08, 2015 1:53 am
Location: Saskatoon, SK, Canada

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Scott Mayers »

Belinda wrote: Mon Nov 22, 2021 12:33 pm Scott Mayers wrote:
Because the myth was a secondary event in which God thought to destroy the world and restart again, the odd way the myth evolved suggests that they had to have had prior knowledge of fossil evidence of ancient beings, including dinosaurs, which led them to derive a 'story' that theorized how and why these fossils existed.
But whether they had or had not prior knowledge of ancient beings, that knowledge would be insufficient for the creation and establishment of an important myth. Farmers have little time and energy for academic speculations.
See my last post above to uwot on any expansion of my argument for this. The splitting of the history into two distinct whole worlds of Earthlings has no valid meaning to the farmer either. Most would lack the direct intellectual reflections that get passed on just as we do today from our childhood on. Thus, if one was not interested in the actually interpreting the stories from normal everday life, they'd be the ones who pass on the mythologized forms WITHOUT the knowledge of the original authors and why it would devolve into religion. Those who actually intellectually derived the explanations of reality would be encouraged to teach these through entertaining ....or they'd lose their audience in the same way as you assumed of this farmer.

Otherwise, what importance do you think such a PARTICULAR myth would provide that was universally created in isolation from one another? When you first heard the story, did it have any 'connection' to reality as any allegory or moral lesson to you?
Age
Posts: 8972
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2018 8:17 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Age »

Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:04 am
Age wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 1:43 pm
Whenever one begins a so-called 'argument' with, "Because the 'myth' ...", BEFORE it has been PROVEN that 'it' is an ACTUAL 'myth', then what you are going to do is just get the ones who ALREADY BELIEVE that 'it' is a 'myth', like you do, LISTEN to you, and the ones who do NOT believe that 'it' is a 'myth' NOT LISTEN to you.
Yes, I assumed this a myth as you and others should know by now that I'm atheist.
Were you a so-called "atheist" BEFORE you make ASSUMPTIONS, like this one, or is it your ASSUMPTIONS, like this one, that makes you a so-called "atheist"?

And, does being a so-called "atheist" mean that that one HAS TO SEE EVERY word or story, written in the bible for example, as being a myth?
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:04 am If one is religious, would you be surprised if they simply begun a thread by assuming a default of truth to their particular scripture's story?
OBVIOUSLY, you have NOT YET WORKED OUT, by now, that, to me, NO MATTER what ANY one says, I suggest that it is much better for them that they have the ACTUAL PROOF, BEFORE they make the ACTUAL CLAIM. That way NO ASSUMING is NEEDED, and ONLY thee ACTUAL Truth is being said, shared, and told.
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:04 am This discussion presumes apriori no religion, a position that is the LEAST biased and one in which any animal born with the likeness of intellectual reflection would require being taught by some religion of their environment.
LOL "a position that is the LEAST BIAS".

This topic, literally, BEGINS with the BIAS that the "noah's ark' story is a MYTH. How much MORE bias could there be?

The "athiest's" religious views and BELIEFS are a BLINDING here.

The fact that DISBELIEVERS can be MORE RELIGIOUS than the BELIEVERS are can be CLEARLY SEEN and OBSERVED sometimes.

Advice was just given. Considering that advice or leaving it completely is completely up to ANY of you.
Belinda
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Belinda »

Scott Mayers wrote:
what importance do you think such a PARTICULAR myth would provide that was universally created in isolation from one another? When you first heard the story, did it have any 'connection' to reality as any allegory or moral lesson to you?
That particular myth was about a particular urgent emergency and how to deal with it practically and psychologically. Naturally I did not use that terminology when I first heard the story.
There is an interpretation of myths about fairies which resembles your fossils interpretation of Noah's Flood.The myths about fairies were to do with its being wise to propitiate them with gifts of food. This probably stemmed from colonisation, by a stronger race, of lands originally inhabited by an older race, even perhaps Neanderthals.These aborigines would have to retreat to secret places in the hills from where they would need to come stealing when they could, and were slightly threatening , but never sufficiently threatening for any bigger myths than minor folk tales.
uwot
Posts: 5652
Joined: Mon Jul 23, 2012 7:21 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by uwot »

Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amI agree that the Black Sea's deluge may have value of general flood myths but it wouldn't defend how the same kind of deluge involving the whole world would and all animals everywhere.
How big do you think the writers believed the world was?
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amAll of my religious related theories or speculation derives from my assumption that all religions originate from actual reality that only devolved into myths and misinterpretation through time.
I think that is a reasonable assumption. Religions generally include a creation myth that aims to explain three key questions: Where did the world come from? What is it made of? And how does it work? That much it has in common with science, but whereas science might speculate something like: Big Bang, matter/energy, forces; religion might opt for: father, son and holy ghost.
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amThe majority of people prior to the last few centuries were not literal readers and had to rely on memory, entertaining stories, or to any pre-established 'authenicating' sources as accepted by political powers affecting culture. As such, I proposed other theories/speculation, like the origin of temples and sacrifices similarly.
Well yes, state religion and its dazzling power and beauty. Cathedrals are big and opulent for a reason.
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 am[Maybe "Noah" comes from a word meaning "new" for instance(?)]
Easy enough to find out:"Noah is a given name and surname most likely derived from the Biblical figure Noah (נוֹחַ) in Hebrew. It is most likely of Babylonian origin from the word "nukhu" meaning repose or rest, which is possible in view of the Sumerian/Babylonian source of the flood story. Another explanation says that it is derived from the Hebrew root meaning "to comfort" (nahum) with the final consonant dropped."https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Noah_(name)
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amThe Greeks had their Titans as did many religions. This suggests the link to dinosaurs and other strange but structurally related beings to humans that would be spread from far reaches.
Maybe. I've heard of a theory that the Cyclops...well hang on let's google it:
"A possible origin for one-eyed Cyclopes was advanced by the palaeontologist Othenio Abel in 1914. Abel proposed that fossil skulls of Pleistocene dwarf elephants, commonly found in coastal caves of Italy and Greece, may have given rise to the Polyphemus story. Abel suggested that the large, central nasal cavity (for the trunk) in the skull might have been interpreted as a large single eye-socket." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cyclopes
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amThe news of such would not be trivial news and so in such 'meeting' places as the early cities of the Middle East would be known even if some never directly witnessed the evidence. I imagine it would be so absurdly interesting that those discovering such fossils would also likley bring samples where possible (most of which likely no longer exist if highly valued).
We do know that some people speculated about evolution. This is Empedocles' take: "Here sprang up many faces without necks, arms wandered without shoulders, unattached, and eyes strayed alone, in need of foreheads."
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amI believe we falsely interpret archeology and other scientific wisdom as recent and arrogantly dismiss the ancients as utilizing religion irrationally like those extreme cults of today.
Yes, there are plenty of people who don't know their historical arse from their elbow. Serious scholars broadly agree with you though. Let's not forget that internet chat rooms aren't always the best place to find them.
Scott Mayers wrote: Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 amI argue by assuming the times and what it would be like if I were there...
Quite right too. There is no point trying to interpret ancient explanations of the phenomena they were familiar with in the context of everything we now know.
Belinda
Posts: 5759
Joined: Fri Aug 26, 2016 10:13 am

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by Belinda »

uwot wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote: ↑Wed Nov 24, 2021 4:57 am
I argue by assuming the times and what it would be like if I were there...
Quite right too. There is no point trying to interpret ancient explanations of the phenomena they were familiar with in the context of everything we now know.
I'd rather assume that there are aspects of social structures common to all societies of men whenever and wherever. Myths are part of all social structures . Social structures evolved 'because'***they help individuals to live long enough to have offspring. Myths fit into social structures as narratives about how to live social lives and myths coexist with human language. We all tell stories all the time to ourselves and to others. What I am typing now is my chosen narrative.

It's true that many myths are creation myths and broadly those too explain in narrative form how men fit the general scheme of nature. All individuals who are not self destructive need to know how to harmonise with their environments including natural forces, other species, and other men.

Arguably the most important myths in today's world are the narratives about how men are the best and the glory of all nature and therefore deserve whatever they want to take from the natural environment. If this mythic genre could be rapidly superseded by myths of total harmony with the natural environment it's possible we can, with the help of science, avoid the worst of the demise at least of civilisation and probably humanity too.

('because' ***: I mean the natural selection algorithm)
User avatar
attofishpi
Posts: 5473
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 8:10 am
Location: Orion Spur
Contact:

Re: The roots of Noah's Ark myth...

Post by attofishpi »

vegetariantaxidermy wrote: Mon Nov 22, 2021 11:44 am
Dontaskme wrote: Sun Nov 21, 2021 7:01 pm?
DAM I think it's time you have an avatar, may I suggest the photo Veg took of you:-

Image
Post Reply