Announcement

Collapse

Apologetics 301 Guidelines

If you think this is the area where you tell everyone you are sorry for eating their lunch out of the fridge, it probably isn't the place for you


This forum is open discussion between atheists and all theists to defend and debate their views on religion or non-religion. Please respect that this is a Christian-owned forum and refrain from gratuitous blasphemy. VERY wide leeway is given in range of expression and allowable behavior as compared to other areas of the forum, and moderation is not overly involved unless necessary. Please keep this in mind. Atheists who wish to interact with theists in a way that does not seek to undermine theistic faith may participate in the World Religions Department. Non-debate question and answers and mild and less confrontational discussions can take place in General Theistics.


Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

Noah - the Clean and the Unclean

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Noah - the Clean and the Unclean

    One fact that struck me long while reading the Flood myth was the use of "clean" and "unclean". We're these terms from the Mosaic Law, which was given over a millennium later according to Ussher?

    For me this anachronism is significant evidence that the Noah story was not meant to be "literal" but rather a theological lesson on YHWH's judgment on sin.

    I'd like to hear how Genesis literalists dig their way out of this.

    K54

    Source: BibleGate; Ge 7:2


    Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

    © Copyright Original Source


  • #2
    Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
    One fact that struck me long while reading the Flood myth was the use of "clean" and "unclean". We're these terms from the Mosaic Law, which was given over a millennium later according to Ussher?

    For me this anachronism is significant evidence that the Noah story was not meant to be "literal" but rather a theological lesson on YHWH's judgment on sin.

    I'd like to hear how Genesis literalists dig their way out of this.

    K54

    Source: BibleGate; Ge 7:2


    Of every clean beast thou shalt take to thee by sevens, the male and his female: and of beasts that are not clean by two, the male and his female.

    © Copyright Original Source

    Ussher said that it was Moses who created the Law?
    The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

    [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
      Ussher said that it was Moses who created the Law?
      Not Ussher! I said Ussher's dates. I chose Ussher because many KJV-onlyers use those dates.

      But how could you say something so dumb?

      The Law was given to Moses, over 1000 years after ye greate fludde. So how would Noah understand this terminology?

      Very simple question.

      K54

      P.S. Of course it all could be a Federal Gubmint conspiracy.

      Comment


      • #4
        Average YECs/gap creationists may not have an easy answer for this one, but I do know that those who continue to hold to the dietary laws -- such as my parents -- will just say that God established the laws against eating unclean meat from the beginning and that God's giving of the laws to Moses was more of a reminder than new information.
        Last edited by Duragizer; 02-27-2015, 07:46 PM.
        "When the Western world accepted Christianity, Caesar conquered; and the received text of Western theology was edited by his lawyers…. The brief Galilean vision of humility flickered throughout the ages, uncertainly…. But the deeper idolatry, of the fashioning of God in the image of the Egyptian, Persian, and Roman imperial rulers, was retained. The Church gave unto God the attributes which belonged exclusively to Caesar."

        — Alfred North Whitehead

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
          Not Ussher! I said Ussher's dates. I chose Ussher because many KJV-onlyers use those dates.

          But how could you say something so dumb?

          The Law was given to Moses, over 1000 years after ye greate fludde. So how would Noah understand this terminology?

          Very simple question.
          Do you think that the story of Abraham and Isaac going to sacrifice has no bearing on when Moses' Law took effect?
          The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

          [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

          Comment


          • #6
            Why is this in Nat Sci? Wouldn't it be more appropriate in Theology or Apologetics?
            "[Mathematics] is the revealer of every genuine truth, for it knows every hidden secret, and bears the key to every subtlety of letters; whoever, then, has the effrontery to pursue physics while neglecting mathematics should know from the start he will never make his entry through the portals of wisdom."
            --Thomas Bradwardine, De Continuo (c. 1325)

            Comment


            • #7
              Could just be the obvious - when the writer put pen to paper he used 'clean/unclean' contextually as 'dinner/not dinner'. No unclean animals are domesticated - the writer may simply have used the terminology of his time to make the thing clear to his readers.

              Ancient writers tended to be substance over form so it's perfectly consistent with known practice of the time.



              "He is no fool who gives what he cannot keep to gain that which he cannot lose." - Jim Elliot


              "Forgiveness is the way of love." Gary Chapman

              My Personal Blog

              My Novella blog (Current Novella Begins on 7/25/14)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by Duragizer View Post
                Average YECs/gap creationists may not have an easy answer for this one, but I do know that those who continue to hold to the dietary laws -- such as my parents -- will just say that God established the laws against eating unclean meat from the beginning and that God's giving of the laws to Moses was more of a reminder than new information.
                Well, that's interesting. But, why would God make such a big dramatic deal of codifying the Law with Moses and the Levites?

                Other than (possibly) the Ark myth there is no other mention of the Law before Moses. As important as the Law was to the Hebrews, one would think there would be some mention of the dietary laws before the Exodus.

                My explanation makes more sense to me.

                K54

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                  Could just be the obvious - when the writer put pen to paper he used 'clean/unclean' contextually as 'dinner/not dinner'. No unclean animals are domesticated - the writer may simply have used the terminology of his time to make the thing clear to his readers.

                  Ancient writers tended to be substance over form so it's perfectly consistent with known practice of the time.


                  That ain't bad, Teal, that ain't bad.

                  K54

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Boxing Pythagoras View Post
                    Why is this in Nat Sci? Wouldn't it be more appropriate in Theology or Apologetics?
                    Because it deals with the possible occurrence of the literalness of the Greate Floode story.

                    It's a theological/exegetic argument against a literal (world-wide) flood.

                    This line of reasoning goes hand-in-hand with the complete lack of geological and genetic evidence for such a flood.

                    I.e., it's complementary to the natural science.

                    K54

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                      Do you think that the story of Abraham and Isaac going to sacrifice has no bearing on when Moses' Law took effect?
                      No.

                      God directly ordered and then stopped the sacrifice.

                      Pretty obviously not connected as there are centuries in between Abraham and Moses.

                      And there's a LOT more to the Mosaic Law than animal sacrifice -- which was fairly common in the ANE.

                      K54

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Do you think that prohibitions against stealing and murder did not exist until Moses?
                        The greater number of laws . . . , the more thieves . . . there will be. ---- Lao-Tzu

                        [T]he truth I’m after and the truth never harmed anyone. What harms us is to persist in self-deceit and ignorance -— Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by Truthseeker View Post
                          Do you think that prohibitions against stealing and murder did not exist until Moses?
                          In most all cultures, no.

                          But what does this have to do with Mosaic dietary laws?

                          Do you always try to confuse the issue when an exceedingly simple to understand topic is brought forth?

                          "Clean/Unclean" -- how would Noah know what these meant before the Law?

                          Originally posted by Galatians 3:16-19, KJV
                          16 Now to Abraham and his seed were the promises made. He saith not, And to seeds, as of many; but as of one, And to thy seed, which is Christ.

                          17 And this I say, that the covenant, that was confirmed before of God in Christ, the law, which was four hundred and thirty years after, cannot disannul, that it should make the promise of none effect.

                          18 For if the inheritance be of the law, it is no more of promise: but God gave it to Abraham by promise.

                          19 Wherefore then serveth the law? It was added because of transgressions, till the seed should come to whom the promise was made; and it was ordained by angels in the hand of a mediator.
                          P.S. IIRC, Noah lived before Abraham.
                          Last edited by klaus54; 02-27-2015, 11:53 PM. Reason: ps

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                            As important as the Law was to the Hebrews, one would think there would be some mention of the dietary laws before the Exodus.
                            You say that, but claim in the OP that the only such mention is an anachronism.



                            Also, this should not be in NS.
                            Last edited by Paprika; 02-28-2015, 03:28 AM.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Teallaura View Post
                              No unclean animals are domesticated
                              Pig

                              Roy

                              P.S. Camel, rabbits, white mice
                              Last edited by Roy; 02-28-2015, 05:40 AM.
                              Jorge: Functional Complex Information is INFORMATION that is complex and functional.

                              mikewhitney: What if the speed of light changed when light is passing through water? ... I have 3 semesters of college Physics.

                              Mountain Man: First of all, the Bible is a fixed document.
                              Mountain Man: … this is how liberals argue these days, with labels instead of ideas.

                              Comment

                              Related Threads

                              Collapse

                              Topics Statistics Last Post
                              Started by lee_merrill, 10-30-2020, 09:01 PM
                              28 responses
                              120 views
                              2 likes
                              Last Post thormas
                              by thormas
                               
                              Started by Whateverman, 07-26-2020, 11:01 AM
                              330 responses
                              6,602 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Electric Skeptic  
                              Started by shunyadragon, 09-09-2016, 03:27 PM
                              1,251 responses
                              55,023 views
                              0 likes
                              Last Post Tassman
                              by Tassman
                               
                              Working...
                              X