jc.bhebrew at googlemail.com
Sun Jan 17 06:58:12 EST 2010
Some have suggested a critique of the term translated 'all of the earth'.
The use of the word 'earth' in translation suggests to the typical English
mind that the flood covered the entire planet. However, the Hebrew allows
for the translation of 'all of the land' which a critique may suggest refers
to a particular subset of the land on the earth. To me, however, this is
clearly not the intended message.
Even if the flood were not global the story so far in Genesis restricts the
human populace to the ANE, AME regions having just come out of Eden. The
highest mountain in the region, Mount Ararat is given as the landing place
of Noah. If we are to assume that Mount Ararat was covered with water then
by implication pretty much all of the Earth except its highest peaks would
also have to have been covered. Can we theorise that Genesis is suggesting
that human families who had spread so far from their starting point in Eden
had managed already to reach as far as and civilise areas such as Tibet and
to run to the top of the mountains of K2 and Everest to survive the flood?
Did Armstrong really walk on the moon? Who shot JFK? As you can see we seem
to be fast walking into the twilight zone of conspiracy theories.
The message of Genesis is clear. The offspring of Adam and Eve had grown
very bad (catalysed by their relationship with the 'sons of God'). Noah and
his family were saved while the rest were killed. Noah and his family landed
in Ararat and they spread throughout the then inhabited earth having
children and 'civilising' the Earth.
2010/1/17 Yigal Levin <leviny1 at mail.biu.ac.il>
> Dear Doug,
> While it's difficult to prove that the Bible specifically refers to "we
> all", the context does seem to imply that all humans living after the flood
> are descended from Noah and his sons. The following chapter, Gen. 10, often
> referred to as "The Table of Nations" depicts the 70 nations of the world
> (in the writer's conception) as a family group with a common ancestor -
> Noah. In later Judaism, by-the-way, "sons of Noah" came to refer to
> Gentiles, who, while not bound by the Mosaic Covenant/Law (the Torah), are
> bound by the "Noahide Covenant" of Gen. 9, which includes both blessings
> basic laws. This was understood by the rabbis as meaning that a Gentile who
> wants to be "right" with God does not have to convert to Judaism, but
> just accept these basic laws. The same concept seems to be behind the
> decisions of the so-called "Council of Jerusalem" at which the Apostles
> decided that a Gentile convert to Christianity need not accept the entire
> Today the title "Noahide" or "Bnai Noah" is used by groups that have
> abandoned non-Jewish religions (such as Christianity) but have chosen not
> convert to Judaism, preferring to live as "Righteous sons of Noah"
> to Jewish Law.
> A to the second part of your question, whether or not Moses wrote this or
> any other part of the Torah, is a matter of faith and will NOT be discussed
> Yigal Levin
> Co-Moderator, B-Hebrew
> -----Original Message-----
> From: b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org
> [mailto:b-hebrew-bounces at lists.ibiblio.org] On Behalf Of Doug Belot
> Sent: Sunday, January 17, 2010 6:14 AM
> To: b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
> Subject: [b-hebrew] Noah
> Could you give an opinion on what is being stated here in Gen 9:19, is it
> the Hebrew a positive statement that we all came from Noah .
> NIV Gen 9:19 These were the three sons of Noah and from them came the
> people who were scattered over the earth.
> NKJ Gen 9:19 These were the three sons of Noah and from these the whole
> earth was populated.
> And can we know if Moses wrote this passage.
> doug belot
> b-hebrew mailing list
> b-hebrew at lists.ibiblio.org
More information about the b-hebrew