Hi - Not sure what you are saying . It says that God gave people the animals for food after the flood, which implies that they did not hunt or eat animals before the flood. Would you agree with that? Also, there was no capital punishment before the flood. Cain and Lamech, both murderers, went free. This could suggest that before the flood, human violence reached a level that exceeded that of today, which made the flood necessary. In this respect, the institution of capital punishment (a kind of cap on violence) after the flood seems to be linked with the promise never to destroy all life by flood again.
The extension of capital punishment to animals might suggest that some animals hunted and ate humans, before the flood. I am also interested in the word, tannin (pl. tanninim) which seems to refer to any land or sea animal that is capable of hunting humans. This could suggest that there is truth behind human legends of dragons and sea monsters.
26 comments
Could someone correct me if I#m wrong, but isn't the main difference between clean and unclean animals if you are allowed to eat them?
So if no one did eat any animals before the flood, how did Noah know which animals would be unclean (only two of each get taken onto the ark) and which are clean (seven of each get taken on)?
Or, maybe, mythology of bronze/iron age Middle East tribes should be taken with a grain of salt, even if it is a basis of one's won religion?
Hi Spud,
It's good to see an earnest searcher after the truth humbly display his curiosity in such an open manner. Congratulations to you for your frank adoption of the most difficult and deepest philosophical methods in your ongoing quest to make sense of it all.
best wishes, Pule
P.S. Have you tried YahooAnswers yet?
P.P.S. Love the dragons and sea monsters. Aren't they cool!?
...or you're using any kind of crap to keep yourself in that river in Egypt about the fact that there's simply too much evidence that proves all of the Bible is ALL lies, and you're a deluded & mentally handicapped cunt for accepting those fairytales as fact .
Remember: All you have is a book of fairytales (in the guise of [un]'Intelligent Design', a.k.a. Creationism by Stealth ) that was legally debunked in Kitzmiller vs. Dover in 2005. We have the fossils. We win .
"This could suggest that there is truth behind human legends of dragons and sea monsters"
No, this suggests you have no ability to distinguish reality from fantasy.
Providing that the flood myth is true, the reason that your god gave man animals to eat is because he wiped out all plant life in an effort to destroy all evil.
Geez...I know potatoes that are smarter.
"And Abel also brought an offeringfat portions from some of the firstborn of his flock. The Lord looked with favor on Abel and his offering"centuries before the Noachian flood
Sheesh, at least know your OWN holy book.
alligators, sharks, lions, wild dogs, bears all come to mind before dragons.
which implies that
Let's try out your way of reaching conclusions:
God let it rain for 40 days and 40 nights, which implies that that prior to that there was no water on the Earth.
Noah put two of each animal in the arc, which implies that there were only two of each animal in existence at the time.
God told Noah exactly how to build the arc, which implies that that was the first boat of any kind ever made.
Hey! This is fun.
And yet in Cinderella, it clearly states that mice turn into horses and pumpkins into carriages, then change back at midnight. So, clearly, you are wrong.
If the above arguments sounds dumb, that's exactly how appeals to the bible sound like to me.
A tannin (also known as vegetable tannin, natural organic tannins or sometimes tannoid, i.e. a type of biomolecule, as opposed to modern synthetic tannin) is an astringent, bitter plant polyphenolic compound that binds to and precipitates proteins and various other organic compounds including amino acids and alkaloids.
You are not even close...
Yes, I'd agree that the Bible implies that humans did not hunt or eat animals before the flood. That doesn't explain why we have the teeth of omnivores, though. And, it's just what the Bible says, you still have to show it has any relevance on reality.
Capital punishment is a cap on violence? If you mean that it stops violence, then explain why North Africa and the Middle east (which have capital punishment) are so much more violent than the EU (which does not).
There are enough land or sea animals capable of hunting humans, that you don't have to go believing in fairy tale monsters, silly.
So, what does all this have to do with reality? The Bible only has relevance for those who believe in it, which is about 2 billion people (and most of them believe it's allegory at most). That means that about 5 billion do NOT believe in it.
Death penalty can't be extended to animals because they have no self awareness and, in religious terms, soul. It's ridiculous to sit a dog, for example, in a court.
Confused?
So were we! You can find all of this, and more, on Fundies Say the Darndest Things!
To post a comment, you'll need to Sign in or Register . Making an account also allows you to claim credit for submitting quotes, and to vote on quotes and comments. You don't even need to give us your email address.
