In the wake of the release of the movie Noahs ark, I have been doing some thinking about the original story. Some observations come to mind: 1. The story is not unique to Genesis. Accounts of a flood exist in most ancient texts. More specifically, the Babylonian account (which pre-dates Genesis) reads very similar - Utnapishtim is the name to check out. Im beginning to wonder, considering the relationship between the Israelites and Babylon, whether the accounts in the early chapters of Genesis were simply a re-hash of Babylonian legends. The similarities are so striking! 2. The flood could not have been global. There are records of flourishing civilisations in China, Egypt, Babylon and Mesopotamia existing straight through the flood era. If there were indeed a flood, it was a local flood. 3. Even though calculations suggest that Noahs ark could have floated, no one has yet constructed a modern day non-steel reinforced wooden ark of the dimensions of Noahs ark that has successfully floated. 4. There is new evidence to suggest that the ark was made from reed and had a circular design. This evidence is from a Mesopotamian clay tablet, lending further credence to the fact that this story isnt unique to Genesis. There are other observations but these probably suffice - for now. Is the flood account a myth? I dont think so. But it seems very unlikely that it carries the same significance that the Genesis account and creationists attach to it.
Posted on: Thu, 03 Apr 2014 15:45:46 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015