LIONEL PODCAST: My Favorite Biblical Myth of All Time

Better than Gilligan’s Island.

Growing up in Catholic school, before retiring, I was amazed at the straight-faced nuns who’d present some Biblical stories went were beyond absurd on their face. And that analysis was so important in my development — my critical thinking development, that is. While my classmates may have nodded in Pavlovian obeisance, it took all I had not to burst out laughing. The movie Noah has incurred the wrath of many Christian commentators as is their right. And this is still the definitive piece on dissecting the fable Noah and the Ark. At least the “history” of that which it purports to depict. But as far as absolute impossibility, sheer and unmitigated “You’ve got to be kidding me!” myth, nothing comes close to the the Ark. Since I was a kid and I heard the story of how mankind was essentially eliminated 5000 years ago and then sprung back with an incomprehensible level of biodiversity, I’ve marveled at how anyone with two neurons together could think for a moment this was the absolute truth. And disbelieving the fantastic story and obvious parable of Noah in now way disproves God. The two have nothing to do with each other. But fact and religious parable are two different things. Just remember Gould’s non-overlapping magisteria. Science and God can coexist, just never overlap. But Noah and Creationism (while we’re at it) tax credulity. It challenges rational thought. Much like Gilligan’s Island made me wonder how could the Professor make anything with that little bike, anything but a transmitter. How did they bake pies? Why did the Howell’s take so much stuff in suitcases including cash, brandy and keys to their homes, not to mention why they’d waste their time on a three-hour cruise on a garbage scow. But Gilligan wasn’t real but Noah is? Right?

Just the facts, ma’am.

Perhaps one of the more difficult problems proponents of a universal flood have to answer, and one they most often avoid, is how could the eight survivors of the Flood produce the numerous racial types of man that exist upon the earth. A belief of the “Christian” sect known as creationism is that all the world was populated from the descendants of Noah’s three sons. In other words, “all tribes and races came from a common ancestral population.20 Creationists are forced to place this common population, consisting of eight persons, some time after the Flood since they believe in the extinction of all people by a universal Flood. Noah and his family were obviously of one race. The Bible states that Noah was “perfect in his generations” (Gen. 6:9). The word “generations” here is the Hebrew word “T0LEDAH,” and means “descent.” Noah was perfect in his descent from Adam meaning his lineage had not mixed with any other races. Creationist try to tell us that this racially pure family developed (or evolved) into the present day races, but never specifically explain how, when or why this transformation occurred. The concept that all nations and races descended from Noah’s sons did not originate with the early Christian writers. When the famous naturalist and zoologist Georges Cuvier devised his classification of races in 1790, he listed three types: Caucasoid, Mongoloid, and Negroid. Soon afterwards many started comparing this classification with Noah’s three sons, Shem, Ham and Japheth. As racial distinctions became more evident and debated, the churches and literalists picked up on Cuvier’s classification and molded it into a new religious doctrine. They taught that the Negroid race descended from Ham, the Mongoloid race from Japheth, and the Caucasian race from Shem. This doctrine insults and contradicts both the word of God and science.

Cuvier’s classification of races was just prior to the advent of Egyptology   the studying and discovering of the ruins of ancient Egypt by such men as Jean Francois Champollion in the 1820′s. The ancient Egyptian monuments, tombs, and temples reveal a vast storehouse of ethnographical records in the form of paintings, mummies and sculptures displaying different racial types of man. Certain racial types can be distinguished in paintings and sculptures dating as far back as the 4th millennium B.C., as Prof. Coon explains: “…racial differentiation can be traced back to at least 3,000 B.C., as evidenced in Egyptian records, particularly the artistic representations.”21 In the era just after the Flood (2300 to 2000 B.C.) there appear many clear and well marked racial types in the paintings and sculptures from Egypt as well as Mesopotamia. By 1600 B.C., an even greater diversity of distinct racial types can be found. Each of these types are represented as they appear today showing that they were permanent throughout all history and had never undergone any type of transformation. Creationists would have us believe that eight white people that existed after the Flood, somehow changed into different racial types almost instantaneously. Why is it that this type of drastic evolutionary change has never occurred since? If we can believe that such a racial transformation occurred, then there should be no reason not to believe any manner of evolution occurring over tens of millions of years, for the latter is more believable than the former. It is important to understand the hypocrisy and inconsistency that “creationism” rests upon. Creationists are allowed to do the impossible because they are on God’s side, but evolutionists are not allowed to use the same principles in presenting their ideas. Evolution is evolution whether used by “creationists” or “evolutionists.” Thus if an amphibian could not gradually evolve into a reptile, then a group of white people could not have evolved into Negroes, Indians, Chinese, Polynesians, Pygmies, etc., especially in just a few hundred years time or less.

The racial evidence supplied to us by the ancient paintings and sculptures from Egypt and elsewhere clearly dispels a any foolish notion of a worldwide flood. This evidence of the antiquity and permanence of the races, which is verified by the laws of genetics, proves that all people were not destroyed in a universal Flood. To overcome this problem, some have suggested Noah brought a representative pair of each race on the Ark.22  Peter, in speaking of the Flood, says that only “eight souls were saved” on the Ark (1 Pet. 3:20 & 2 Pet. 2:5). The only way then to get the other races on the Ark is to say that these other races are not regarded as people, but are inferior “beasts” or “living creatures.” The claim that other races were on the Ark is sheer speculation. The science of ethnology and anthropology have shown that every single racial type that existed prior to the Flood existed after it. This proves that the Flood was confined to a specific geographical area. ALL people on earth were not destroyed by the Flood as creationists claim. In Luke 17:26-29, Christ likens the “days of Noah” with the “days of Lot.” In each case the people experienced a catastrophe which “destroyed them all.” Yet everyone acknowledges that “in the days of Lot” all the people on earth were not destroyed, only all the people in Sodom were. Likewise, only all the people in the Flood were destroyed, not all the people on earth. It cannot be supported by any rational or biblical means that all races were destroyed by a flood and then instantaneously reappeared or were formed thereafter. It is infinitely more logical that all races were separately created by God on the planet, and they each survived the Flood, as did numerous other life forms, by being outside its realm and geographical influence. _______________________________________

20 Henry M. Morris. Scientific Creationism, p. 183.

21Carleton Coon, The Origin of the Races, 1962, p. 3

22 The book, The Genesis Flood, pp. 17-20, stressed the point that all mankind was destroyed by the Flood,” and that “Noah and his family were the only ones who escaped the judgment waters.”

And speaking of religion.

In my latest reminder of how open-minded the Vatican is to EBE’s and UFO’s, dig this piece on “Brother Extraterrestrial.” A lot of folks would be surprised at just how progressive and open-minded Il Papa and the gang are. The Church has given the okay as to Darwinian mechanics, natural selection and evolution. In fact JP Deuce may have been the most demonstrative in his support. But, I’ll bet you never knew they were this with the program when it came to ET critters.

In fact, did you hear about this conclave and coven? It was in all the papers.

Are we alone in the universe? The ultimate question of life beyond Earth and the solar system takes center stage in a science conference led by the Vatican Observatory and a University of Arizona this week. Nearly 200 scientists are attending the conference, called “The Search for Life Beyond the Solar System: Exoplanets, Biosignature & Instruments,” which runs from March 16 through 21 in Tucson, Ariz. The Vatican Observatory is co-hosting the conference with the University of Arizona’s Steward Observatory. “Finding life beyond Earth is one of the great challenges of modern science and we are excited to have the world leaders in this field together in Tucson,” said event co-chair Daniel Apai, assistant professor of astronomy and planetary sciences at the UA Steward Observatory, in a statement. “But reaching such an ambitious goal takes planning and time. The goal of this meeting is to discuss how we can find life among the stars within the next two decades.” [9 Exoplanets That Could Host Alien Life]

Trackbacks and Pingbacks:

%d bloggers like this: