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

  • #16
    Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
    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
    I think the influence of supposed ANE culture is really overrated. The fact that we are universally human pretty much trumps cultural claims of some sort of exclusiveness.

    There are facts of cultural evolution that is similar in the Orient as in the Middle East. Cultures naturally evolve from Animism> Polytheism> Monotheism, and from Animal and human sacrifice to symbolic sacrifice as cultures evolve from the Neolithic>Bronze Age>Iron Age>Advanced Civilizations.

    Pastoral Cultures in arid and semi-arid regions are predominantly goat and sheep as sources for meat. In mesic higher rainfall regions swine predominate. Different breeds of cattle over lap these climates where suitable. This is true in the Middle East, Africa and the Orient.

    The Bible just simply reflects these normal natural trends. The Hebrew tribes were predominately pastoral semi-arid to arid hill country in the interior around Palestine and raised mostly goats and sheep. Other cultures in the higher rainfall coastal regions raised swine.

    These very natural relationships between cultures and the environment can easily explain what is described in the Bible as Revelation and Divine Law.
    Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-28-2015, 07:52 AM.
    Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
    Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
    But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeareís Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

    go with the flow the river knows . . .

    Frank

    I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

    Comment


    • #17
      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.



      Sus scrofa otherwise known as swine, hogs or just plain old pigs

      Archaeological evidence indicates that pigs were first domesticated some 15,000 years ago in the Mid East. That's probably about 2000 years earlier than sheep and maybe 5000 years before cows.
      Last edited by rogue06; 02-28-2015, 11:05 AM.

      I'm always still in trouble again

      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
        My explanation makes more sense to me.
        Shocking. Shocking, I say!
        "Neighbor, how long has it been since youíve had a big, thick, steaming bowl of Wolf Brand Chili?Ē

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by rogue06 View Post

          Sus scrofa otherwise known as swine, hogs or just plain old pigs

          Archaeological evidence indicates that pigs were first domesticated some 15,000 years ago in the Mid East. That's probably about 2000 years earlier than sheep and maybe 5000 years before cows.
          I believe sheep and goats were the earliest in the Middle East and in Central Asia.

          Source: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab57



          The first animals known to have been domesticated as a source of food are sheep in the Middle East. The proof is the high proportion of bones of one-year-old sheep discarded in a settlement at Shanidar, in what is now northern Iraq. Goats follow soon after, and these two become the standard animals of the nomadic pastoralists - tribes which move all year long with their flocks, guided by the availability of fresh grass.

          Cattle and pigs, associated more with settled communities, are domesticated slightly later - but probably not long after 7000 BC. The ox may first have been bred by humans in western Asia. The pig is probably first domesticated in China.

          The first reason for herding sheep and goats, or keeping cattle and pigs in the village, is to secure a regular supply of fresh meat. The hunter is dependent on the luck of the chase; if more animals are killed than can be immediately consumed, meals from the surplus will be increasingly unpleasant as the days go by. The herdsman, by contrast, has a living larder always to hand and a supply of dairy products as well.

          These animals also provide for almost every other need of Neolithic man. While they are alive, they produce dung to manure the crops. When they are dead, leather and wool for garments; horn and bone for sharp points, of needles or arrows; fat for tallow candles; hooves for glue.


          Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/...#ixzz3T3qj1O1e

          © Copyright Original Source



          Some sources give earlier dates for domestication for both. I will have to check more. Most cite earliest domestication of pigs in the Tigris Euphrates River Valleys by sedentary agricultural cultures. domestication of sheep and goats were in pastoral cultures.
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 02-28-2015, 11:28 AM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeareís Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
            I believe sheep and goats were the earliest in the Middle East and in Central Asia.

            Source: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab57



            The first animals known to have been domesticated as a source of food are sheep in the Middle East. The proof is the high proportion of bones of one-year-old sheep discarded in a settlement at Shanidar, in what is now northern Iraq. Goats follow soon after, and these two become the standard animals of the nomadic pastoralists - tribes which move all year long with their flocks, guided by the availability of fresh grass.

            Cattle and pigs, associated more with settled communities, are domesticated slightly later - but probably not long after 7000 BC. The ox may first have been bred by humans in western Asia. The pig is probably first domesticated in China.

            The first reason for herding sheep and goats, or keeping cattle and pigs in the village, is to secure a regular supply of fresh meat. The hunter is dependent on the luck of the chase; if more animals are killed than can be immediately consumed, meals from the surplus will be increasingly unpleasant as the days go by. The herdsman, by contrast, has a living larder always to hand and a supply of dairy products as well.

            These animals also provide for almost every other need of Neolithic man. While they are alive, they produce dung to manure the crops. When they are dead, leather and wool for garments; horn and bone for sharp points, of needles or arrows; fat for tallow candles; hooves for glue.


            Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/...#ixzz3T3qj1O1e

            © Copyright Original Source



            Some sources give earlier dates for domestication for both. I will have to check more. Most cite earliest domestication of pigs in the Tigris Euphrates River Valleys by sedentary agricultural cultures. domestication of sheep and goats were in pastoral cultures.
            P bone?
            "Kahahaha! Let's get lunatic!"-Add LP
            "And the Devil did grin, for his darling sin is pride that apes humility"-Samuel Taylor Coleridge
            Oh ye of little fiber. Do you not know what I've done for you? You will obey. ~Cerealman for Prez.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Paprika View Post
              You say that, but claim in the OP that the only such mention is an anachronism.



              Also, this should not be in NS.
              1) Yes, it should be in Nat. Sci. since it complements the lack of scientific evidence for a global flood.

              2) If the Noah were told the terms "clean/unclean", which weren't defined until at least the time of Abraham, then that is the very definition of "anachronism".

              Perhaps "prolepsis" is a better term.

              K54

              Source: dictionary.reference.com

              anachronism [uh-nak-ruh-niz-uh m]; noun

              1. something or someone that is not in its correct historical or chronological time, especially a thing or person that belongs to an earlier time:
              The sword is an anachronism in modern warfare.

              2. an error in chronology in which a person, object, event, etc., is assigned a date or period other than the correct one: To assign Michelangelo to the 14th century is an anachronism.

              © Copyright Original Source



              Source: dictionary.reference.com

              prolepsis, noun;

              1. Rhetoric. the anticipation of possible objections in order to answer them in advance.

              2. the assigning of a person, event, etc., to a period earlier than the actual one; the representation of something in the future as if it already existed or had occurred; prochronism.

              3. the use of a descriptive word in anticipation of its becoming applicable.

              4. a fundamental conception or assumption in Epicureanism or Stoicism arising spontaneously in the mind without conscious reflection; thought provoked by sense perception.

              5. Pathology. the return of an attack of a periodic disease or of a paroxysm before the expected time or at progressively shorter intervals.

              © Copyright Original Source

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                Shocking. Shocking, I say!
                Soitenly!!!



                K54

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  I think the influence of supposed ANE culture is really overrated. The fact that we are universally human pretty much trumps cultural claims of some sort of exclusiveness.

                  There are facts of cultural evolution that is similar in the Orient as in the Middle East. Cultures naturally evolve from Animism> Polytheism> Monotheism, and from Animal and human sacrifice to symbolic sacrifice as cultures evolve from the Neolithic>Bronze Age>Iron Age>Advanced Civilizations.

                  Pastoral Cultures in arid and semi-arid regions are predominantly goat and sheep as sources for meat. In mesic higher rainfall regions swine predominate. Different breeds of cattle over lap these climates where suitable. This is true in the Middle East, Africa and the Orient.

                  The Bible just simply reflects these normal natural trends. The Hebrew tribes were predominately pastoral semi-arid to arid hill country in the interior around Palestine and raised mostly goats and sheep. Other cultures in the higher rainfall coastal regions raised swine.

                  These very natural relationships between cultures and the environment can easily explain what is described in the Bible as Revelation and Divine Law.
                  You pretty much agree with me, with general Neolithic/Chalcolithic/Bronze Age culture substituted for the more specific ANE.

                  The fact remains that pre-Judaism clean/unclean terminology was an aspect of the Mosaic Law, long after Noah.

                  K54

                  K54

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Moderators: Would this be better in Archaeology?

                    I don't want it in a Theist-only area.

                    Thanks!

                    K54

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      I believe sheep and goats were the earliest in the Middle East and in Central Asia.

                      Source: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/PlainTextHistories.asp?historyid=ab57



                      The first animals known to have been domesticated as a source of food are sheep in the Middle East. The proof is the high proportion of bones of one-year-old sheep discarded in a settlement at Shanidar, in what is now northern Iraq. Goats follow soon after, and these two become the standard animals of the nomadic pastoralists - tribes which move all year long with their flocks, guided by the availability of fresh grass.

                      Cattle and pigs, associated more with settled communities, are domesticated slightly later - but probably not long after 7000 BC. The ox may first have been bred by humans in western Asia. The pig is probably first domesticated in China.

                      The first reason for herding sheep and goats, or keeping cattle and pigs in the village, is to secure a regular supply of fresh meat. The hunter is dependent on the luck of the chase; if more animals are killed than can be immediately consumed, meals from the surplus will be increasingly unpleasant as the days go by. The herdsman, by contrast, has a living larder always to hand and a supply of dairy products as well.

                      These animals also provide for almost every other need of Neolithic man. While they are alive, they produce dung to manure the crops. When they are dead, leather and wool for garments; horn and bone for sharp points, of needles or arrows; fat for tallow candles; hooves for glue.


                      Read more: http://www.historyworld.net/wrldhis/...#ixzz3T3qj1O1e

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      Some sources give earlier dates for domestication for both. I will have to check more. Most cite earliest domestication of pigs in the Tigris Euphrates River Valleys by sedentary agricultural cultures. domestication of sheep and goats were in pastoral cultures.
                      At the risk of citing Wikipedia (which is actually pretty good in these sort of matters):

                      Source: Domestic pig


                      Archaeological evidence suggests that pigs were domesticated from wild boar as early as 13,000–12,700 BC in the Near East in the Tigris Basin[13] being managed in the wild in a way similar to the way they are managed by some modern New Guineans.[14] Remains of pigs have been dated to earlier than 11,400 BC in Cyprus. Those animals must have been introduced from the mainland, which suggests domestication in the adjacent mainland by then.[15] There was also a separate domestication in China which took place about 8000 years ago.[16][17]


                      Source

                      © Copyright Original Source



                      It appears that pigs have been domesticated for 14,700 to 15,000 years in the Tigris region (confirming what I said) and 13,400 years in Cyprus. That is considerably earlier than in China. Moreover, pigs, an unclean animal, have been domesticated for a very long time so the idea that domestication is the basis for separating between clean and unclean does not appear to be justified.

                      I'm always still in trouble again

                      "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                      "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by rogue06 View Post
                        It appears that pigs have been domesticated for 14,700 to 15,000 years in the Tigris region (confirming what I said) and 13,400 years in Cyprus. That is considerably earlier than in China. Moreover, pigs, an unclean animal, have been domesticated for a very long time so the idea that domestication is the basis for separating between clean and unclean does not appear to be justified.
                        All this begs the question of why pigs were domesticated, if they weren't eaten. Ok, they're exceedingly useful for producing non-food products (paintbrushes, glue, leather, manure, bone tools), but not sufficiently moreso than other animals to justify domesticating them for non-dietary purposes. They can't be ridden, they can't help in hunting, they don't catch vermin, they don't lay eggs, and they don't fit in small cages. Is the ability to hunt truffles and eat peelings really that necessary?

                        I suspect that the prohibition against pork is a later development.

                        Roy
                        Last edited by Roy; 02-28-2015, 02:59 PM.
                        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 on covid-19: We're talking about an illness with a better than 99.9% rate of survival.

                        Sparko: Even the deists like Jefferson believed in the Christian God, ...

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Roy View Post
                          All this begs the question of why pigs were domesticated, if they weren't eaten. Ok, they're exceedingly useful for producing non-food products (paintbrushes, glue, leather, manure, bone tools), but not sufficiently moreso than other animals to justify domesticating them for non-dietary purposes. They can't be ridden, they can't help in hunting, they don't catch vermin, they don't lay eggs, and they don't fit in small cages. Is the ability to hunt truffles and eat peelings really that necessary?

                          I suspect that the prohibition against pork is a later development.

                          Roy

                          Chinese farmer riding his pig to market




                          From 1915




                          Another vintage photo




                          A few random photos




                          Oops. That's a pig riding a hog




                          And no, I'm not seriously arguing that pigs were breed for riding. I'm just being a lao jerk, which is just one of the things we rogues do

                          I'm always still in trouble again

                          "You're by far the worst poster on TWeb" and "TWeb's biggest liar" --starlight (the guy who says Stalin was a right-winger)
                          "Of course, human life begins at fertilization thatís not the argument." --Tassman

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            The gal with an Uzi is especially funny. Is that a kosher pig?



                            K54

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              John Walton in his commentary on Genesis writes:

                              Source: Genesis by John H. Walton

                              While the initial instructions indicate that "pairs" of all living creatures are to be taken into the ark, when more specific instructions are given, one pair of unclean animals and seven pairs of clean animals are to be taken. The distinction between clean and unclean animals was not an innovation established at Sinai, but here is seen as early as Noah. Evidence from Egypt and Mesopotamia offer no system equivalent to the Israelite system of classification. While there are dietary restrictions in those cultures, they tend to be much more limited--that is, certain animals restricted only to certain classes of people or on certain days of the month. Even here one cannot assume that the classification has implications for their diet. Up to this time no permission has been granted to eat meat (see 1:29). When meat is granted to them as food after the Flood (9:2-3), there are no restrictions along the lines of clean and unclean. Thus, I conclude that the classifications concerns sacrifice, not diet, in this period.

                              © Copyright Original Source



                              So, essentially what he's suggesting is that there was a distinction between clean and unclean in sacrifice to the one true God before Moses. Assuming the God of Noah was also the God of Moses, God would know which animals would later be declared clean or unclean to the later Israelites. This becomes, then, a type of foreshadowing.


                              Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                              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
                              I don't think this does what you think it does. I believe one can hold to a literal interpretation of the text, and still maintain that the incident is localized and not world-wide (I believe scholars like John Walton, John Sailhamer, and Tremper Longman III provide sufficient reasons to correlate a literal reading of the text to a localized event). I believe this really is a theological/textual question, and not one that's specific to the Natural Science subforum.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by klaus54 View Post
                                The gal with an Uzi is especially funny. Is that a kosher pig?



                                K54
                                At first glance I coulda sworn that was Michael Jackson. Maybe it's time for those reading glasses...

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by lee_merrill, 06-03-2021, 11:57 AM
                                1 response
                                38 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Christian3  
                                Started by Machinist, 05-26-2021, 10:52 AM
                                97 responses
                                522 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by seer, 05-12-2021, 05:35 AM
                                557 responses
                                3,486 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Stoic
                                by Stoic
                                 
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-09-2021, 09:43 AM
                                21 responses
                                189 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 05-09-2021, 09:34 AM
                                144 responses
                                1,079 views
                                1 like
                                Last Post Hypatia_Alexandria  
                                Working...
                                X