Can Someone Reject Christian Teaching But Look For God

An interesting woman blogged about how to find God when she rejects virtually all Christian doctrine. She suggests people find different metaphors than the old one of God in the sky.

She thinks the minds of young adults like herself are constantly trolling for flaws in religious arguments. Thus, the view that things get better after you are dead, prayer to God will prevent some bad thing from happening and “me and my group” understand the faith better than those other groups will often be met with indifference.

She wishes the faith was about God things that are unknown instead preaching as if much is known. She sees mystery in nature and thinks these may have something to do with God. This gives her more comfort than sermons about sin.

Thus, she would like discussions about whether God might be present today in nature. She does know if the god is there but it would give her more comfort than a far off god that might pass judgment in some far off time. Thus, God as a tree would replace God as a heavenly something or another.

It seems to me there is always tension between the god we can predict will condemn abortion and homosexuality and the god so mysterious we are not to know his mind. There are those who say we do not know the mind of the god but are sure he is mad a those we do not like.

Disagreements among the faithful continue even though each branch knows it is right.

90 Responses

  1. Dennis

    this young person and people who believe as she does may be closer to the truth than any of the organized religions. It seems these folks are looking for spirituality while the older, organized groups are looking for power and money (which is one in the same).

    1. Dennis 5:28 It seems these folks are looking for spirituality while the older organized groups are looking for power and money (which is one in the same.)

      Great way to express how it looks to me as well.

    2. Jinx II

      I completely agree with you Dennis! I have always believed spirituality is a deeply personal state, thanks so much for posting your great point.

  2. Troy Kraft

    There is one almighty God. God’s Word in contained in one Holy Bible. Every human being represents an eternal soul housed in a temporary human body. The natural wages war with the divine. The natural body ends with this life, and returns to the dust from which it came. The soul lives forever and forever. At the time of natural death, the soul will return to God that created it. God has promised that the soul’s eternal home will be heaven or hell… everlasting joy or everlasting torment… with a great gulf fixed between the two.

    Since the beginning, human nature defaults to denying God, God’s Word, and God’s plan. What is it about our nature that looks for reasons to reject God? I am a man no better nor worse than the next. I find it no easier to lay down my will. But I am absolutely convinced that when this life and/or world ends, there is one God that will judge every individual soul – by the same standard that God set from the beginning… not the rules that man/religion make for himself, and change for his convenience. And his conscience.

    1. Christian M.

      Troy’s statement actually does not represent Orthodox Christianity. It is closer to a form of early Gnosticism. God cares grateful for physical creation–which is why our hope is not heaven as an eternal destination, but a physical resurrection and a restoration of all things! The Apostle Paul himself argued this type of theology in I Corinthians 15.

      The truth about the young person in your article: she is not far from what God has said about himself. Psalm 19:1-4 speaks of how creation speaks of who God is. Christians (myself included) would do well to head the instruction of the Psalmist and consider what creation is revealing. I believe the sciences ultimately attest to the wisdom of God.

      Ultimately, I do believe that Jesus is the way to relationship with God…but that we grow in understanding of God through the natural world.

      Thanks for posting!

      1. Christian 7:12 The truth about the young person in your article: she is not far from what God has said about himself.

        Every Christian is given a license at a certain point to pick and choose the parts of the Bible that reinforce what he/she believes without using the Bible. We don’t know who wrote the Bible. A logical conclusion is it was written by the wealthy of that time. We can assume the wealthy of that time were like the wealthy of any period, they were preoccupied with remaining wealthy. The Bible is all about controlling the poor.

        1. Christian M.

          HI Jon,

          Thanks for facilitating the discussion. This is a helpful outlet.

          I must comment on your response:

          “We don’t know who wrote the Bible. A logical conclusion is it was written by the wealthy of that time.”

          I will say, for the benefit of all. Christians in the past (and some currently) have [wrongly] used the Bible to reinforce horrendous actions. But we must look to the text itself to see what it has to say about the rich and the poor. The truth is, Jesus has harsh things to say regarding the rich–and much to say for the poor. So I don’t see your statement holding logical water. The assumptions you make are a-contextual (with all due respect).

          Thanks again for the forum! It is an honor to engage in the conversation.


          1. Dennis

            Your comments are pretty well thought through, except the writer(s) of the Bible had to give the poor some hope for a better future (even a better future in a fabulous or non-existant place) or the poor may have rebelled and distributed the wealth among themselves. Without hope, even the most docile creature will rebel.

          2. Christian M 1:41 The truth is, Jesus has harsh things to say regarding the rich–and much to say for the poor.

            You make a good point–it is harder for a rich man to get to heaven than for a camel to pass through the eye of the needle, etc. And, he told the young rich man to give away his money.

            We have to remember this was written by wealthy men–the only literate people of that time. And, they did not hear Jesus say this–no writer claims to have heard him say anything attributed to him. So, if there was a Jesus, which may or may not be true, he may or may not have said any of this. The only thing we can be certain of is that some wealthy person wrote and had some reason to write it. What reason would there be?

            There is not much in the Bible about rich followers of the faith giving all their money to the poor. Maybe, then, the words they put in Jesus’ mouth meant something other than how it is interpreted today. I googled up “rich, Jesus” and the first and only reference I looked at said it is likely that the reference Jesus talk about the “rich” referred to those with money who were poor in the spirit. Thus, they should be humble (not necessarily poor) to get into heaven. That is to say, the rich men who wrote the Bible were criticizing other rich who were the stuffed shirts of that time. Many other opinions I am sure.

          3. Juan Ruiz

            “That is to say, the rich men who wrote the Bible were criticizing other rich who were the stuffed shirts of that time. Many other opinions I am sure.”

            While the early Church celebrated Roman aristocrats for suffering martyrdom for Christianity (George, Cecilia, Felicity…), the reality is that most converts were hopelessly poor. It’s reasonable, therefore, that their new god attacks the rich.

  3. A simple insight revealed it all to me !

    “you shall have no other gods but GOD !” Exodus 20.3 in the SPIRIT OF GOD

    Three nouns
    bad little God’s

    There is only one place for religions of men, judaism-christianity-islam-others, and that is as bad little god’s hindering the relationship between me & GOD !

    I have been on a one on ONE wilderness adventure ever since and it has been amazing !

    NATURE is the Intimate Companion of GOD !

    1. Bob 5:38 Thanks for your comment.

      Anyone can look for God anywhere they want. Whether they find God or not is another matter.

      Do you have any advice for those who cannot find God anywhere?

  4. Juan Ruiz

    ” Moses wrote the first five Books of the Bible.”

    This was disputed centuries ago. Most scholars today see Moses as a myth. Authorship of the Torah belongs to numerous story tellers.

  5. Today’s values are a problematic foundation for understanding the Bible. For instance: The presumption that the writers of the Bible were wealthy. Moses wrote the first five Books of the Bible. He was brought up an aristocrat but left that behind when he led his people out of Egypt, wandering around in the desert for 40 years, eating a bland diet of mana. He brought down the Ten Commandments from Mt. Sinai, that included Thou Shalt Not Steal, Thou shalt Not Covet Thy Neighbor’s Land, Cattle, etc. He was also denied entry into to Promised Land.

    Most of the major and minor prophets’ Books of the Bible were written by outcasts, whose land had been stolen by the most powerful empires of that time. Paul who wrote much of the New Testament, living hand-to-mouth for years as he journeyed from one house church to another before being put under house arrest for two years in Rome, followed by brutal crucified. None of these examples in any way exemplify physical wealth.

    You may be thinking of the Pharisees and the Sadducee’s, who were the Jewish leaders during Jesus’ time. They were legalistic, men concerned more about the jot and tittle of daily life than their everlasting souls. Jesus repeatedly condemned them, while nurturing his small group of Apostles, none of whom were wealthy, as they were poor fishermen and horrors of horrors, one was even a tax collector.

    An aside that’s always fascinated me about the ancient Jews and the Greek philosophers, both were the most learned peoples of the ancient world. For them, the puzzles of language and philosophy were more valuable than gold.

    1. Juan Ruiz

      “They were legalistic, men concerned more about the jot and tittle of daily life than their everlasting souls.”

      This is pure Christian propaganda, written for audiences who didn’t have a clue about the realities of Judaism in the Middle East. The Sadducees were nothing more that the aristocratic priesthood, Temple functionaries to saw to proceeding there (money changing, sacrifices, festivals…). The Pharisees were the sages and interpreters of the Torah. They were not monolithic. Rather there were different schools with different interpretations, led by a head teacher (rabbi). These included Akkiva, Shammai, Hillel, Gamaliel, and others.

      The true villains in the story, the Romans, avoided accusation because, after all, the ran the Empire. Getting on the wrong foot with them was not wise. So Pilate gets portrayed as a quisling for the high priest, when in reality, the high priest served at his pleasure.

      1. So we agree the Pharisees and the Sadduces were not good leaders of their flock. My point was about the economic status of the writers of the books of the Bible, not a quibble about long dead Jewish leaders who weren’t gifted writers of any of the books of the Bible, hence their extinction.

        Imagine for a minute if the Pharisees and the Sadducee’s had been Godly men, opening their eyes and ears to the prophesies of their faith and seeing them in life with Jesus. Their embrace of Jesus as the Messiah, which would have transformed their vulnerable Jewish faith, so it would have been too risky geopolitically for the Romans to destroy Jerusalem. Judaism could now be the largest religion in the world. Curious that, eh?

        Oh, a question: where did you learn your debating style? Some of life’s most splendid gifts God has given us are our brains to think with, our tongues to share those thoughts with, plus a goodly dollop of delight in learning what others think, instead of this compulsion to crucify someone who has a different point of view. (Pardon my bon mot). Are you a lapsed Jesuit? Combatant? God forbid, a college professor?

        1. Juan Ruiz

          “So we agree the Pharisees and the Sadduces were not good leaders of their flock.”

          You still repeat the Christian myth. The Sudducees were functionaries, the Pharisees interpreters. The NT presents them as schemers, when in reality they couldn’t stand each other.

          As for Jesus, he did not meet any of the requirements of the Jewish Messiah. he was an invention of Saul of Tarsus. He was not a god, but a king or an advisor. Actually, as you read the NT, you see Jesus stripped away from Judaism. By the time you get to John, there is no Jewish Messiah, n son of David born in Bethlehem, but a pre-existing god, who essentially overshadows YHWH in the creeds.

          1. You appear to be splitting hairs over angels on the head of a pin, while my approach is broader, based on the Bible. Schemers, for instance, don’t usually get along, and I did not, nor does the New Testament, contend they were best buds. I realize my primary source is null and void to you, but one skeptic does not negate the most documented, examined book in history.

            Christian myth? Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John’s Gospels were written by eye witnesses. The genealogy of Mary can be traced back to Noah’s son Shem, then back to Adam and Eve. Each of the Gospels reveal a different aspect of Jesus’ life. The book of Haggai prophecies about Jesus, as well as the Book of Isaiah:

            The Messiah: Jesus of Nazareth:

            Will have a Galilean ministry (Isaiah 9:1,2)
            Ministry began in Galilee of the Gentiles (Matthew 4:13-16)

            Will be an heir to the throne of David (Isaiah 9:7; 11:1, 10)
            Was given the throne of His father David (Luke 1:32, 33)

            Will have His way prepared (Isaiah 40:3-5)
            Was announced by John the Baptist (John 1:19-28)

            Will be spat on and struck (Isaiah 50:6)
            Was spat on and beaten (Matthew 26:67)

            Will be exalted (Isaiah 52:13)
            Was highly exalted by God and the People (Philippians 2:9, 10)

            Will be disfigured by suffering (Isaiah 52:14; 53:2)
            Was scourged by Roman soldiers who gave Him a crown of thorns (Mark 15L15-19)

            Will make a blood atonement (Isaiah 53:5 Shed His blood to atone for our sins (1Peter 1:2)

            Will be widely rejected (Isaiah 53:1,3) Was not accepted by many (John 12:37, 38)

            Gentiles will seek Him (Isaiah 11:10) Gentiles came to speak to Jesus (John 12:20,21)

            Will die with transgressors (Isaiah 53:12) Was numbered with the transgressors (Mark 15:27, 28; Luke 22:37)

            Will be buried in a rich man’s tomb (Isaiah 53:9 Was buried in the tomb of Joseph, a rich man from Arimathea (Matthew 27:57-60; John 19:38-42)

        2. mark anthony

          I think that Ruiz may be all of the above: prof, apostate cleric and certainly an opinionated purveyor of the gospel according to, well, who knows who (whom?) (gotta watch my grammar here: Juan is a real stickler for grammar.) could really see him at High Table at Oxford being served by the underlings).

        3. Caro K 4:26 Their embrace of Jesus as the Messiah, which would have transformed their vulnerable Jewish faith, so it would have been too risky geopolitcally for the Romans to destroy Jerusalem.

          I was surprised you believe Moses wrote those chapters of the Old Testament when scholars have noted there are towns mentioned that they can tell from archaeological evidence did not exist until long after the alleged period of Moses. Now we learn you know the mighty Romans would have been backed down by a few Jews.

          1. Henry

            Jon: “I was surprised you believe Moses wrote those chapters of the Old Testament when scholars have noted there are towns mentioned that they can tell from archaeological evidence did not exist until long after the alleged period of Moses.”

            If an archeologist with a confirmation bias were to excavate in some portions of Fargo, they would discover that Fargo began in the 2000’s not in the 1800’s.

          2. Henry 6:44 If an archeologist with a confirmation bias …

            If ever there were archaeologists with a “confirmation bias”, it would be those hired by the country of Israel to confirm that their national identity with the heroic Moses story. They would be paid well to glop onto any shred of evidence it actually happened. They have been looking for decades, nothing there.

          3. Israel has had a large, powerful, secular percentage of their population throughout its history. Increasingly true in the USA–83% are Jews of no religion (Pew survey 2013).

          4. Caro K Israel has had a large, powerful, secular percentage of their population throughout its history.

            I agree Israel has a large secular population. Your use of the word “powerful” does not ring true to me. I perceive, perhaps incorrectly, the most powerful political faction is religious. They keep moving into the occupied territories, use the “God gave us this land” argument, etc. Whatever the case, I know the government funded a large project to pay for archaeologists to find evidence of the exodus. They did not find it.

            Here is a link to one of the professors who searched in the region. He partnered with a professor from Israel.

  6. Juan Ruiz

    “Christian myth? Mathew, Mark, Luke, and John’s Gospels were written by eye witnesses.”

    Actually, they weren’t. Mark and Luke never claimed to be eyewitnesses. MT and JN no one knows who wrote them.

    The Gospels were selected by Irenaeus as canonical. over 100 years after the events. There were many other gospels which he did not approve. And please don’t forget how many centuries it took for them to be declares canonical.

    The fact of the matter is, the Torah is the product of cut and paste. Isaiah is also an amalgam of writers. You, like most Christians, believe what you have been told by others. You do no exegesis on your own. Of course, you’re hampered by your inability to read the original Hebrew, Aramaic, and Greek. Which means you cannot decipher the subtitles of the original languages, the puns, allusions, and the like. That’s ok. Believe what you like. Fine with me.

      1. Juan Ruiz

        Actually, yes, i can. Which is I’ve always insisted here people reading a translation do not understand the original texts.

        1. Juan Ruiz,

          Please explain the meaning of the following:

          “MY BREATH shall not abide in man forever, since he too is flesh, let the days allowed him be one hundred and twenty years.”

          Please be detailed on each part.

          Thank you!


  7. Mark witnessed Jesus’ teaching as a teenager. You’re right, Luke, the doc, just interviewed other eye witnesses. You aspire to prove a negative, me: a positive.
    Interestingly, the Bible is the most copied book in history. There are thousands of copies of the Bible from ancient times, but only 300 of the Iliad for instance. The Bible has a purity of message that is profound, considering it was written by 66 different authors over 1500 years.

    Your argument is formalist and quibbling . The Book of Genesis is the most complete explanation for the creation of the world, and the human condition, I’ve ever read.

    1. Caro 7:17 The Book of Genesis is the most complete explanation for the creation of the world…I’ve ever read.

      Does that make it history?? Or, is it just religion?

        1. Juan Ruiz

          There are two creation stories in Genesis. One in which man and woman are created simultaneously, the other where Adam in created, and then Eve later from his rib. This caused the Jewish sages to invent the myth of Lilith. Which is the right one?

          1. Juan, et al.

            “There are two creation stories in Genesis. Which is the right one?”

            Both, the first is an Executive Summary for the CREATION? of the children of GOD, “CREATED him; male and female HE CREATED them.” This is a relationship to when we get to return to GOD there are no sexes only HOLY CHILDREN OF GOD. The second is additional specifics about how the CREATION was done for earthly living in the flesh.


          2. The Lilith folk story is a red herring, loved by feminists. Genesis chapter one gives the overview of creation. Chapter two fills in the details, including how God created Adam first. The end of chapter one: “…he created him; male (first) and female (second) he created them.”

        2. mark anthony

          a quick and dirty observation. of course Ruiz is right to the extent that he warns about the possible pitfalls of translations, especially translations from an ancient to a modern language. yet, if we follow his logic to its conclusion, it follows that we can’t trust any translation. leaving us, obviously, up the old creek without a paddle. in any case, why all the quibbling about who wrote what, when and how. the point of Genesis, for example, is not that it is literal history, rather the real issue is what was in the mind of whoever wrote it: the “message” in other words. and the message in Genesis is, rather, notably profound. BTW is we were to discover that Shakespeare’s plays were written by Nathaniel Hawthorne would that mean that the plays have no literary or poetic value? hardly! as far as Moses is concerned, the Scriptural account contains too much detail to be written off as merely a tall tale, as a mere copy of some earlier tall tale.

          1. mark 3:07 as far as Moses is concerned, the Scriptural account contains too much detail to be written off as a tall tale…

            You are referring, no doubt, to God tossing down mana and quails from heaven. Not a tall tale at all I assume.

          2. Juan Ruiz

            ” it follows that we can’t trust any translation.”

            You can’t. Ask yourself why the Mormons, JWs, and even Jews for Jesus have their own translation. The text is manipulated to prove the doctrines.

            As I’ve said, every translation is an opinion. What does “Logos” mean in John 1:1? Strong’s Concordance gives 20-some meanings, including invoice.

          3. Jaun 7:27 The text is manipulated to prove the doctrines.

            If our friends who are believers think translators manipulate to serve their own ends, why not assign that motive to the original writers? The original writers do not include people who lived or knew Jesus. None claims to have heard him speak. Yet, the further the time of the writing moves away from when Jesus was supposed to have lived, the more writers “remembered” exactly what he said. By the time the Book of John was written that writer could remember an entire book of Jesus quotes. The further interesting observation is that what a writer wanted to really hammer home some important point, it was put in the mouth of Jesus. Just by “luck”, Jesus happened to believe exactly what the writer believed.

  8. mark anthony

    as far as I know, the manna/quail account is quite probably true. attribute to God or nature, whatever.

    1. Mark 5:12 as far as I know, the manna/quail account is quite probably true. Attribute to God or nature.

      Amazing one can take that literally.

      As the Wikipedia link below points out, Exodus is the founding myth of Israel. Some 20 years ago Israel funded a prominent professor to establish there was an Exodus and a battle to retake Canaan. He and his staff looked for years. They maintain to this day there is no evidence of any of it. The conclusion of scholars is the Jews were indigenous to Canaan and rose to power there. They were not in Egypt as a large group, though some appeared to travel back and forth.

      From what we actually know, it is all a myth.

      1. mark anthony

        remember that the best minds once thought that Troy was a myth. quite honestly I find it hard to accept the notion that a story with so much detail was totally manufactured out of thin air. unlike you, I think that there is a good deal of truth underlying what you call “myths”; factual truth, philosophical truth, psychic truth, whatever. besides I sense that you are using the word myth in a very reductionistic manner: nothing more than a “yarn,” a campfire tale. the classical meaning is much deeper than that: the root of the word is related to mouth, speech, something profoundly true, a metaphysical reality, a unifying origin story. as to the Jewish people, the story there gets a bit complicated. they may have been among the so-called “sea people” who invaded Egypt in, as I recall, in the 12th century BC. the so-called plagues of Egypt (which occurred variously over some period of time, not a few days) may have been, in part, the result of the eruption of Thera around the time of the exodus. and, to be sure, the Jewish people probably were from what is now Palestine (‘tho they may originally have come from Mesopotamia, as in Abram). moreover, the enslavement story makes a great deal of sense: how often have we seen similar stories in history, the antebellum South being one.

        1. Mark 6:41 I agree a story that has no evidence of ever having happened can be helpful and insightful. The Exodus story probably qualifies as being of use in this way. While there are lots of artifacts from periods log before the Exodus was supposed to have happened it would be reasonable to conclude someone might find something. Egyptians keep meticulous records many of which have survived. They make no mention of the what is guessimated as 1/3 of the population leaving. While the Exodus or some version of it might have happened, there is no evidence of any kind. I’ve never read an account by a contemporary peer reviewed scholar which found there is evidence. People do find religious meaning in the story and if that helps them they should make use of it.

      2. We all acknowledge the difficulty of obtaining an accurate translation of 3 ancient languages, so Wiki as a source doesn’t cut it. Not long ago Biblical scholars proved that the Hittites existed. And there was in fact a wall around Jericho. Archeology, like politics, depends on money and whomever controls the money, controls the message. Ironic that most Western people find the vague, undocumented Darwin creation myth more believable than Genesis. Disregarding what everyone witnesses daily: entropy. Everything decays. Your car, your roof, your body, yet the world transformed itself from a big bang, some slime and presto: brain surgeons.

        Jon, I appreciate your forum, for all our differences, it’s a vibrant, open dialog, which is hard to find online. I imagine the Founders could have imagined this would be how the First Amendment could work. Bravo.

        1. Caro K 7:21 Jon, I appreciate your forum, for all our differences, it’s a vibrant, open dialog, which is hard to find online.

          Thanks Caro. It is great to have you here.

        2. Caro K 7:21 so Wiki as a source doesn’t cut it.

          I agree Wikipedia is not a scholarly source. (It is especially questionable because there is a small page about me there. 🙂 )

          A scholarly source, at least it bills itself as such, would be It is devoted to scholarly study of religion.

          In it first publication, Rabbi Zev Farber declared categorically, “Given the data to which modern historians have access, it is impossible to regard accounts of mass exodus from Egypt (or) the wilderness experience…as historical.”

  9. mark anthony

    jon 0953. a question: if the gospel writers wrote what they did to fit their beliefs, then how did they come to believe as they did? that apart, permit me to pose a thought experiment. if as Ruiz dismissively asserts: “believers” (as if he is not himself a believer of sorts) believe as they do because somebody told them, then what of Ruiz? does he not believe what he believes because somebody told him? by some scholar or by some fellow atheist? and if some scholar, then who told the scholar? some ancient text, written by some “wealthy goat herder”? where does the reasoning stop? or are we all tangled in some sort of infinite regression? or do we have to conclude that, at some point in the process, he was told by a verified/reliable source? if so, then how do we know that the source was indeed reliable?

    1. mark 3:48 Good post. I don’t know that I can provide a complete answer to all of that. To start a dialogue, you know full well that if you would had been born into a Hindu society, odds are good you today would believe as Hindus do. A good question would be, where did the Hinduism come from?

      From a social science perspective, as least mine, societies develop certain values over time. The values reflect ideas that allow societies to survive. The religions these societies embrace reflect the values that were there before the religions arrived. Hinduism reflects what its societies believed before Hinduism arrived. But, societies’ values need to adjust as circumstances change. This, inevitably, causes religions not to meet the new values. All religions have always had shelf lives and eventually die out. One of the reasons societies change is because not everyone buys into it values or religion. As circumstances change the doubters convince the majority the status quo must be left behind. Besides the doubters, there are always people who exploit the religious for their own ends, rich preachers for example.

      Back to those who wrote the Bible, there is evidence the tall tails in the Bible were passed down in the culture from previous societies. That does not prove the writers simply adopted them, we cannot ask them where they learned this material. It does seem likely what they believed was passed down. If, as seems likely, the Jews were indigenous to Canaan, how did the become more successful than others competing at that time? I don’t know, but maybe it had something to do with the leadership claiming there was only one best god and got people to organize in some way to move ahead. It seems to me the Jesus story came along when times had changed and it fit where people were then. Some Jews liked it then some pagans and then a dictator and it was off to the races. Only the wealthy could read and write so it is obvious they were the driving force behind its success. They saw it as a why to keep the order they needed for their own protection.

      I think we are living today in a time when Christianity is not a good match for changes in society.

  10. Most totalitarian regimes do not publicize their failures, and a major failure it was too, when a huge chunk of Egyptian free labor exited stage left. Ergo, you will not find much in Egyptian records chronicling this debacle. Needless to say, you won’t find an ancient bronze marker at the spot where the Red Sea parted.

    Starting in the 19th century, archeologists contended a ship the size of the ark would have fallen apart, under such rigorous conditions. They made these presumptions based on 18th & 19th century ship building techniques, dependent on labor costs of their day, and diminished supply of oak trees. But the Ark Museum in Kentucky has consulted with scholars and ship builders who agree that with double walled construction, it could easily have withstood the rigors of a year on the briny. Plus: the ark’s proportions are EXACTLY what sophisticated nautical designers of battleships and oil tankers know=the perfect ratio of length to width to ensure stability.

    Similarly with Bible translations. Despite the difficulty of three ancient languages, there is remarkable similarity in most passages. Of course I’m not including way out editing, such as feminists Bibles that mess about with gender, but the major translations up to the 1984 NIV.

    1. Caro K 6:12 Most totalitarian regimes do not publicize their failures…

      I’ve heard many times Egyptians did not record about the Jews because it would reflect badly on Egyptians. A theory only. The other theory, the Jews were not there. Then nothing about the Jews in the dessert–they could not have survived except God dropped bread for them. The locations and travel story have been excavated and dated. They did not exist when the Jews allegedly were there. Everything points to a tall tale. Nothing to a historical fact.

      1. Henry

        Jon: “Then nothing about the Jews in the dessert–they could not have survived except God dropped bread for them. The locations and travel story have been excavated and dated. They did not exist when the Jews allegedly were there. Everything points to a tall tale.”

        What would you expect to find many thousands of years later in a well-scavenged region from many people traveling by tent? Tent poles? Animal skins? Tent pegs? Concrete foundations? Can’t find a tent rope. Must not be true.

    1. You’re right, every culture in the world has a flood story. It’s not outlandish, therefore to suspect it really happened. What the heroes name isn’t as relevant as what happened, and the evidence it left behind, i.e. sea shells on top of Mt. Everest or the Grand Canyon, with it’s flat straight lines of sediment, consistent with a catastrophic event.

        1. From Jon: Caro K 9:40 No credible credentialed geologist agrees there was ever a world wide flood. So by credentialed do you mean non-believers?

          Here’s one of the most provocative books you may ever peruse: “Noah’s Ark: A Feasibility Study,” by J. Woodmorappe, 1996.


          “All of the solutions to the putative problems with the Ark account in this book are based on a solid study of low-tech animal-keeping techniques, low-tech husbandry, etc. Moreover, far from being fantastic, speculative, or even theoretical, the techniques and solutions that I cite in this book have been APPLIED by various uneducated, pre-industrial peoples throughout history. Much of the contents of my book discusses and documents this central fact. Finally, I demonstrate in my book that there are often SEVERAL low-tech solutions to putative problems with the Ark, and only one of these solutions will do.”

          1. Carol K 10:51 So be credentialed do you mean non-believers?

            No, I mean credentialed. That is PhD professors at secular research universities who have presented or written papers in the field of science. One of many problems with the Noah story is the amount of water needed to flood the earth high enough to kill everyone, the animals and float the boat. There is a finite amount of water in and around the earth. It does not change. If there were mountains or high hills as we have today there would not be enough water to cover them. One poster here a few years ago said God pumped down additional water then sucked it back up afterwards. Apparently there are tanks in heaven.

          2. Jon- My husband was a bench biochemist for 30 years, starting in the late 1970s when it was easier to get funding for basic research. As the money dried up, the main research dollars started going to the human genome project and pharmaceutical trials. Then along came climate change. Over this same time period, the percentage of liberals professors at all major public and ivy universities is now about 95% progressive. Imagine how easy it is to get funding approval from that lot on the feasibility of Noah’s ark, or the Exodus. So I propose you consider the evidence, which requires reading abstracts, not just skimming so called ‘credentialed PhD secular university profs.”

          3. murlimews 12:45 to get funding approval from that lot on the feasibility of Noah’s ark.

            It would be next to impossible. But, not because of “liberals”. The problem would be deciding which religion’s flood merited study. The Jewish/Christian Noah flood is only one of dozens or hundreds.

          4. With that logic no one would get funding to study the Crusades, or Ancient Egypt beliefs, because they worshiped cats. Just because you dismiss Jewish-Christian beliefs does not mean it was not a shaper of our world.

          5. I began my work life doing nutritional research in a university Anatomy lab, so I have a pretty good foundation in the scientific method. It’s beyond ironic that the Scope’s Monkey trial pitted the Goliath of Christian control of education in early 1900’s Tennessee with the wee David of a so-called more scientific hypothesis. But now the creation story is outlawed, because it isn’t ”scientific.’ Science doesn’t work like that, you don’t outlaw ideas. Neither account is pure science, for you need a witness to create a hypothesis, test the hypothesis, analyze the results, make a conclusion. BUT we do have a written account, unlike evolutionists’ slime. We also have the evidence of the earth, and all the incredibly complex patterns, lifeforms, etc. none of which could happen by chance, even in a trillion years, it’s like saying your two year old child accidentally made a souffle when he broke a bunch of eggs on the stove. You may find that idea charming beyond count, but it doesn’t make it scientific.

        2. mark anthony

          not so fast Jon. we have credible evidence of sudden flooding of the Black Sea, probably with significant loss of human life. moreover, as far as I know, there was a huge release of fresh water when glacial melt (20-15K yrs ago) broke thru the St Lawrence valley and dumped into the North Atlantic. this could have triggered a rather rapid rise in sea levels (which as you might recall were then several hundred feet below present levels). such an event, no doubt would have sunk deep into the consciousness of an intelligent mostly hairless primate which at that time was wandering around the world. besides, the breakdown of the last Ice Age could have triggered some very strange weather events, widespread local flooding included, at various places ’round the world, the Middle East in particular. Caro is right, the widespread distribution of flood accounts undoubtedly points some rather cataclysmic goings on during and after the glacial retreat.

          1. mark 11:56 breakdown of the last Ice Age could have triggered some strange weather events, widespread local flooding included

            I agree. There have been large local floods since the beginning of time. Humans and animals had to have water so they lived beside streams, rivers and lakes. They were chased out be floods. The reason “the great flood” is in so many cultures is because they all experienced local floods. The floods went as far as the eye could see. The logical conclusion, “the whole would is flooded”, and the myth goes on.

            A few years ago I was at the Black Hills in SD. We visited a Native American museum just east of the park area. I looked through the books and gifts and found a brief history of that tribe, I’ve forgotten its name. There, sure enough, was the story of chief so and so. He was the only one left after the whole world was flooded and everyone killed. He paddled his canoe to that point, which is a high hill, and started populating the world. I can’t remember how a woman was mixed into the story be it does not matter. It was another of the gazillion stories of local floods.

          2. About floods and glaciers: Creation scientists disagree with uniformitarian ones. According to the book of Genesis, the world was different before the flood. It didn’t rain, waters sprung up from the ground. Until the flood, which God used to destroy evil on the earth, except for Noah, his family and representatives of all the animals. The very meaning of God is he is all powerful. The flood caused major seismic activity cracking open underground streams, etc., plus there was 40 days of above ground rain. Noah’s family and all the animals. were in the ark for over a year. It took over 6 months for all the waters to recede. Such a profound amount of water caused volcanoes, the eruptions of which spewed enough ash and particles in the stratosphere to cause the Ice Age, no doubt syncing with with an ice age a uniformitarian timeline.

          3. murlimews 1:17 I’m trying to understand your time line. You referred to the ice age. That was 10,000 years ago. Humans have been on the planet for 2-300,000 years. That is unless you believe some Christians who believe humans and everything else started only 6,000 years ago.

  11. To all:

    Let’s tip this conversation upside down !!

    Start today and walk backwards !

    Israel the nation is real !

    Hitler was real !

    WWI was real !

    The crusades were real !

    Muhammad was real !

    Jesus was real !

    Ezra was real !

    King Xerxes was real !

    King Nebuchadnezzar was real !

    The Chaldeans were real !

    King Solomon was real !

    King David was real !

    Jericho has been destroyed !

    The Philistines were real !

    Egypt was real !

    Joseph the physician was real !

    The Hebrews were real !

    Ishmael & Issac were half brothers is real !

    Abram was real !

    Humans are real !

    Noah’s Ark was real !

    Humans came from apes !

    Please: Where does history become fantasy relative to Genesis ~ Exodus ~ us ???

    Please draw a line and let’s go from there !

    But consider the following four elements before you start drawing lines:

    We can’t figure out how the ancients constructed much of their societies ?

    There’s a missing link between ape & man ??

    95% of what makes our Universe function is unknown, in the dark ???

    We don’t know what it was before it banged ????

    Clearly it banged in all three theories at the beginning because the LIGHT of Gen 1.3 is different than the sun & moon of Genesis 1.16.

    Always remember to have fun scribbling lines !!!!

    1. kev-you’re a divergent thinker!

      Jon-quoting Jun Ruiz, “…you believe what you’ve been told. That is fine with me.” As do we all, make sense of what we’ve been told, read, and, I hope, analyzed to the best of our abilities.

      1. Caro K,

        One must diverge from the darkness to find the light & then converge on the light to truly understand it !!!!

        I haven’t believed anything I’ve been told, I have been working out GOD & THE COSMOS on my own.

        I’m scribbling the third theory !!!!


        1. Surely you jest. You don’t stop at red lights, vote on election day, passed a course by answering questions correctly because your instructors educated you?

          1. Caro K,

            Separate the theoretical from the practical !!

            When it comes to GOD & the COSMOS we are talking theoretical !!

            When it comes to stopping at red lights, and passed courses that’s practical !!

            I live in the USA and was denied my Religious Freedom and Right to Vote because I wouldn’t enter a christian religious fortification polling place to vote !! I tried to vote at a non-religious polling place in my district and was turned away by the polling authorities !! And 11 months later the state rejected my complaint.

            It appears freedom in the USA is a hoax !!


        2. kev-Oops, I see, you were referring to God. I think it’s an advantage see what others believe, just as a doctor doesn’t have to invent medical school to learn medicine. It’s what you do with what you’ve read, for example what doesn’t fit the party line, i.e. blood letting didn’t heal people. I’ve found C.S. Lewis a witty, well-rounded divergent thinker. U,K. engineer Dr. Stuart Burgess’, “Hallmarks of Design,” is insightful beyond count. Some of the most convincing books I’ve read are, “Origins of Species,” by Charles Darwin, “People of the Lake,” by Richard Leaky, “Lucy” by Donald Johanson, etc.

    2. Kev 8:54 Then there was William Tell of the William Tell Overture. Never existed.

      Noah’s Ark, there were lots of them. Countless societies have a big flood story. They always have their own hero. Noah only belongs to the Christians and Jews.

      1. mark anthony

        sorry Jon but you missed (sidestepped) my point re the Ice Age climate upheavals. most certainly, there were localized flood events that would have impressed the natives. but we are talking here about something quite extraordinary, not something mythical (mythical in your sense of the word, not mine). or something beyond a commonplace high river event. BTW, I don’t know about William Tell but I do know that George Washington didn’t chop down the cherry tree.

        1. mark 3:22 Yes, there were big floods in some places during the ice age. I asked my geologist friend several years ago, “Where did all the moisture come from that formed the glacier that later was the lake where Fargo sits today?” He said oceans were lower at that time. So, yes, there were great floods in certain areas. Does that mean all the sinners in the world were drowned and Noah and his family started from scratch repopulating the world?

          Or, does the flood story mean wealthy people at the time the story was written felt they could better control those under them telling them of sinners who died because they did not follow the rules of the wealthy class? What is more clever than taking a flood story that has been passed down around campfires forever and altering it to make lessers knuckle under? As scholars have said for generations, stories in the Bible were aimed at a specific audience of that time and were intended to deliver a specific message to that audience. The Noah story is transparent about this.

          1. What’s with this obsession with wealthy rulers? Noah and his family were ridiculed and scoffed at because of their ark enterprise. And if they were so wealthy they could have built the ark a lot more quickly than 100 years.

            Try imagining for a minute, or however long you can, God creating a world with stiff-necked people, with God-given free-will, who take all the riches of the world for granted, and ignore God’s simple request that they follow a few simple rules on how to live a good life, starting with appreciating him?

          2. mark anthony

            you are attributing evil and I think farfetched/unsubstantiated motives to the ancient people who experienced the Ice Age climatic upheaval. besides I said nothing about the literal take on the Noah story. for all I know there may have been a man with a big boat that somehow got mixed up in the legend. but forget literalism: there is a meaning behind the myth, a meaning which meant a great deal to the folks at the time. and, I would add, a meaning that is relevant to Western history, shaped as it was by the Jewish people. BTW, the Greeks have a legend about a goddess who repopulated the world after the Great Flood. also BTW, I grew up very near the southern shore of Lake Agassiz, the glacial lake that eventually broke its bounds and dumped huge amounts of fresh water in the North Atlantic. there are still some very large lakes that are remnants of Agassiz (Lake of the Woods thought to be one of them). and the southern shore was a great source of gravel for the construction industry. also, lots of marine fossils.

          3. mark 5:08 you attributing evil and I think farfetched/unsubstantiated motive to the ancient people who experienced the Ice Age climatic unveil.

            I apologize if it seems like I attributed “evil”, that is not what I think of the Bible’s authors. I attribute to them the same strengths and weaknesses that all humans have. There were just being people, looking out for their own interests. That view is popular with many who make their living studying the Bible. I was quoting almost directly a pastor friend, retired from the American Baptist denomination.

            I’m having trouble understanding what the Bible has to do with the Ice Age. Is there some way to date the Noah flood story at 10,000 years ago?

        2. The problem we’re having here is most of us has a working knowledge of one of the hypotheses of creation but no knowledge-or respect-for even the possibility of there being another credible hypothesis.

          My granddaughter is on her small private school’s debate team. The first rule they’re learning about debating well is to know both sides of the argument.

  12. mark anthony

    Jon 1717. what has Scripture to do with the Ice Age? in the case of Noah, a lot. the story is undoubtedly a legend that grew out of our species’ recollection of events past, recalling an event that stuck in our consciousness and was passed from generation to generation. no need, then, to hold that the account had to written 10,000 yrs BCE. anyway, so far as we know, there was no writing at that time. but language, yes.

    1. Mark–If you are saying the Noah story was not
      about a world wide flood that killed everyone except Noah and his family and is a myth based on local floods generations back, then we are in agreement .

  13. mark anthony

    yes at some level we are in agreement. however I am using myth in a stronger sense than you do (see previous post re myth). the Noah story, altho’ not literally true, does mark a significant turning point in Jewish thinking about the world. there is the Noahide Covenant: I am not a Scripture scholar but I do know enough to know that the Noah myth has some profound meaning in the Jewish tradition. and it does reflect home sapiens’ recollection of some cataclysmic events.

    1. mark 9:02 however I am using myth in a stronger sense than you do

      I don’t, or try not to, underestimate the power of myth. People often believe something is literally true when it has never been shown to be literally true. Add to that evidence that it could not possibly be true given in information we have available. I call such things myth. Noah’s flood is such a myth but, I agree with you, the power of the story probably changed a society and is taught to children in Sunday Schools today. It provided something people needed when it was written and continues to do so.

      Let’s deal with another one, death. Humans fear death and their instinct is to avoid it. Along comes a religion that tells them, “We’ve beaten death. Join our group and you get a pass. In fact, you get a second life that’s better than the one you now have.” No one has ever observed this second wonderful life. It is impossible with known information. The afterlife is a myth. But the myth plays to the human fear of death. Thus, Christianity has been very successful selling the myth as literal fact. That does not mean everyone, or anyone, should accept it as anything but myth.

  14. mark anthony

    you seem to think that a myth (or some aspects of a myth cannot be true: that myths are intrinsically untrue or, as Plato would have it, they are noble lies. Obviously some myths are untrue, even evil/destructive lies, but lies that are often accepted as “truths”. that much said, myths do contain or convey many truths (or may even be based on truths, whether factual, psychological, metaphysical truths). You are, I fear, deeply influenced by a kind of literalism which keeps you from exploring/comprehending the depth of meaning of Scripture or, for that matter, the meaning of the old pagan myths. that said, I certainly acknowledge the fact that much in Scripture and elsewhere is to be taken literally: either it happened or it didn’t.

    1. Mark 5:03 Sorry about your posting problem. I think I was trying to approve it while you were doing another post. Your posts should go up without approval but for some reason some who post just never do. Then, when I click “approve” sometimes it reverses right away.

      I like your post. I think I have already agreed with you that myths are influential. Fictional writing has cause good changes. Uncle Tom’s Cabin, for example, portrayed black people in a light that had not been done before and move along anti slavery.

      Where I do not think myth has a place is when it gets mixed up with historical events or attributes to people traits that are untrue. These untrue things come to be treated as history or current truth and are advocated to become public laws. To say we should have laws based on something Jesus was claimed to have said would be a bad idea–we don’t know that he said it. That one fertilized egg is a human being is a myth and should not be treated as fact in our laws.

Comments are closed.