There are often huge divides between what something is ideally supposed to be and in reality what it ends up being. The divide that I want to discuss is that which exists in modern orthodoxy. How did the ideology depart from reality in such a severe way?
In the ideology behind modern orthodoxy a Jew is supposed to follow their Rabbi's judgement, like Jews have been doing for thousands of years. The greatest source of these halachic dicisions are based on the Rama and Shulchan Orech. However, in reality modern orthodoxy is usually described by people to be a lower level of observancy. The women are described as wearing pants, not covering their hair and just having a lower level of modesty than their ultra orthodox counterparts. The men are considered to be unlearned and less observant.
First off, I think these generalizations are incorrect. There may be people that associate with modern orthodoxy that do not follow strict halachic guidelines, but this is analagous to there being people that associate with Charaidi Judaism that cheat and steal. Do these people take away from the ideology of Charaidi Judaism? Exactly, they do not and neither do the people that are more lax about certain halachas that associate themselves with modern orthodoxy.
Modern orthodoxy is the branch of orthodox Judaism that believes it is possible, because of the changes in the world, to coexist with the outside world. No longer are Jews segregated and confined to the ghetto, but they must adapt to a new world where the Jew and non-Jew are viewed as equals and partners in society. Modern orthodoxy is the religious Jew standing up and saying that I will contribute to society as a whole. This is also why modern orthodoxy recognizes science as valid.
There have been several Jews that have lived in societies that were more integrated than the ghettos of Europe. The Rambam, Ralbag and Meiri are just a few great Torah scholars that lived in countries where Jews and non-Jews lived together and had constant interactions. This is why they embraced science and universal morals that applied to Jews and non-Jews alike. This was in opposition to some of their counterparts that lived in lands where Jews were constantly being killed by their gentile neighbors.
The question remains, are the Jews of this day and age supposed to view their non-Jewish neighbors as nonentities or are we supposed to interact with the societies around us in this day and age? Well, the modern orthodox philosophy says that we must interact and associate ourselves with our gentile neighbors. However, it seems like the Charaidi society believes in the seclusionary method of the European Ghettos.
Obviously, I think the modern orthodox approach makes more sense, but only time will tell us who is truly correct. Should we be like Avraham and show the world the beauty and truth of the Torah or should we be like Yaakov and seclude ourselves in Goshen?
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Sunday, October 25, 2009
The Tower of Babel, Who Else Talks ABout It?
The Bible discusses the Tower of Babel at the end of this week's parsha:
In his book, Chaldean Account of Genesis (1880), George Smith of the British Museum—the scholar who translated the Babylonian flood account—published a fragment which is certainly reminiscent of the Bibles record. The inscription tells of an ancient tower. “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built. They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded” (1880, 29).
From an archaeological standpoint the precise site of the ancient tower of Babel is a matter of uncertainty, for there are possibilities among the remnants of several ruins in the region. Many, following Jewish and Arab traditions, locate the tower ruins at Borsippa (the “Tongue Tower”), about eleven miles southwest of the northern portion of Babylon. Others identify the site with Etemen-an-ki (“the temple of the foundation of heaven and earth”), which is located in the southern sector of the city near the right bank of the Euphrates river.
It is my opinion that the Tower of babel did in fact exist. However, if one reads the text closely it was not only a tower that they were building, but an entire city. Babel is one of the most ancient of all cities and it stands to reason that, just like the ancient Egyptians had pyramids, that the babylonians built towers as well. In fact, most ancient civilizations built towers. The Egyptians built their pyramids, the Incas and the Aztecs built their pyramids and the Chinese and Hindus had their temples of worship on top of mountains. Therefore, I would say, whether you think they believed in G-D or not it seems logical that a tower was built.
Did this event actually take place? Well according to historians and archaeologists it did. For instance, Abydenus (a Greek historian of the mid-fourth century B.C.), as quoted by Eusebius, spoke of a great tower in Babylon which was destroyed. The record notes: “[U]ntil this time all men had used the same speech, but now there was sent upon them a confusion of many and diverse tongues” (quoted in Rawlinson 1873, 28). However, since he did not live at the time when the tower of Babel would have stood maybe he was wrong.
In his book, Chaldean Account of Genesis (1880), George Smith of the British Museum—the scholar who translated the Babylonian flood account—published a fragment which is certainly reminiscent of the Bibles record. The inscription tells of an ancient tower. “The building of this temple offended the gods. In a night they threw down what had been built. They scattered them abroad, and made strange their speech. The progress they impeded” (1880, 29).
From an archaeological standpoint the precise site of the ancient tower of Babel is a matter of uncertainty, for there are possibilities among the remnants of several ruins in the region. Many, following Jewish and Arab traditions, locate the tower ruins at Borsippa (the “Tongue Tower”), about eleven miles southwest of the northern portion of Babylon. Others identify the site with Etemen-an-ki (“the temple of the foundation of heaven and earth”), which is located in the southern sector of the city near the right bank of the Euphrates river.
It is my opinion that the Tower of babel did in fact exist. However, if one reads the text closely it was not only a tower that they were building, but an entire city. Babel is one of the most ancient of all cities and it stands to reason that, just like the ancient Egyptians had pyramids, that the babylonians built towers as well. In fact, most ancient civilizations built towers. The Egyptians built their pyramids, the Incas and the Aztecs built their pyramids and the Chinese and Hindus had their temples of worship on top of mountains. Therefore, I would say, whether you think they believed in G-D or not it seems logical that a tower was built.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Cain and Able- What was the problem
In the story of Cain and Able, the first children of Adam and Eve, the brothers both offer sacrifices to to G-D. Cain, a man of the land, offers G-D his leftover grains, whereas Able, a Shepard, offers G-D his most choice animal. It is interesting to note that Cain offers G-D his leftover food, but Able, unable to eat meat since it was still forbidden to man at the time, offers G-D the animal that he makes clothes from. Able does not assume that G-D requires food, but rather a symbolic sacrifice, whereas Cain assumes that G-D wants his leftover food. G-D, in turn, accepts Able's sacrifice, but not Cain's. G-D's favoritism to Able's sacrifice causes Cain to lash out and kill Able.
There are a couple questions to ask about this story: why was it that G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cains and was Cain really at fault for killing his brother? The reason G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cain's is because Able understood the true essence of G-D and what the point of a sacrifice is all about. A sacrifice is supposed to be something that brings one close to G-D and by sacrificing the best animal he had, Able was showing G-D that he cares about G-D more than himself. However, Cain thought a sacrifice is supposed to be like tribute that one would give to a foreign king that controls you. Cain was not interested in becoming close to G-D, but rather paying Him off and that is why he gave G-D his leftover food. This is why G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cain's, because Able understood what G-D is, whereas Cain did not.
This brings us to the next question, was Cain at fault for killing Able? Think about it, Cain did not know that death was possible, no one had ever died in the world before and therefore did not realize what he was doing would kill him. This might also be why Cain was not killed himself, but rather just condemned to wander the world as a nomad. The truth is that Cain knew that to strike his brother was wicked and therefore he was exiled, but he did not realize the severity of his actions. Cain knew that striking a fellow human being was wicked since the idea of morals did exist because of Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but Cain did not know about death. Cain acted wickedly and was punished for this, but since he did not know about death could not be punished by death.
There are a couple questions to ask about this story: why was it that G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cains and was Cain really at fault for killing his brother? The reason G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cain's is because Able understood the true essence of G-D and what the point of a sacrifice is all about. A sacrifice is supposed to be something that brings one close to G-D and by sacrificing the best animal he had, Able was showing G-D that he cares about G-D more than himself. However, Cain thought a sacrifice is supposed to be like tribute that one would give to a foreign king that controls you. Cain was not interested in becoming close to G-D, but rather paying Him off and that is why he gave G-D his leftover food. This is why G-D accepted Able's sacrifice and not Cain's, because Able understood what G-D is, whereas Cain did not.
This brings us to the next question, was Cain at fault for killing Able? Think about it, Cain did not know that death was possible, no one had ever died in the world before and therefore did not realize what he was doing would kill him. This might also be why Cain was not killed himself, but rather just condemned to wander the world as a nomad. The truth is that Cain knew that to strike his brother was wicked and therefore he was exiled, but he did not realize the severity of his actions. Cain knew that striking a fellow human being was wicked since the idea of morals did exist because of Adam and Eve eating from the tree of knowledge of good and evil, but Cain did not know about death. Cain acted wickedly and was punished for this, but since he did not know about death could not be punished by death.
Creation According to Ralbag
I will start this topic off with a quote from the Ralbag in his famous book "The Wars of the Lord." He says, "It is necessary that we explain the terms that the Torah uses in its discussion of creation before we explain the account of creation itself, for the understanding of the terms necessarily precedes the understanding of the full sentences."
I think this is often how people think that science contradicts the Bible. I mean, is it possible since G-D can do anything that science is entirely wrong? Yeah, I think it is possible, but why would G-D do that? Why wouldn't He just follow the laws of nature to create everything? What was the point of creating nature if He wasn't going to follow it as much as possible? This is the Ralbag's idea, that whenever possible we try to describe the events in the Bible as natural occurrences.
1)The Ralbag says that the term "earth" (eretz in hebrew) is equivocal. Meaning that it does not have just one simple meaning of the planet Earth. (I believe this is how the Rambam understands it as well)
2) The phrases of Tohu Ubohu (Unformed and void) means something much deeper than astonishingly empty. The Ralbag says that Tohu means the final form. He brings a description why, but for our purposes that is unimportant. What is important is what does "final form" mean. The way it seems to be described is similar to the form of a chair that a craftsman is making, before he even starts making it. Meaning, it is the thought before any act of creation. Just like a man who wants to make something first has to figure out what it is going to look like, that is what Tohu means, the form that a thought provides for an actual physical creation.
Bohu is the first physical matter of any creation. The Ralbag uses this description because the Universe was full of eternally existent matter. It was full of chaos and disorder before creation began and this is why the Ralbag explains Tohu and Bohu this way, because G-D eternally exists, providing the Tohu (The thought of how creation should be) and Bohu eternally exists (The physical matter). This is the Ralbag's idea and if you want to understand it further just ask me to explain more deeply. He holds of the idea that creation was the creation of something from something.
3)Also, the terms of "light" and "dark" are equivocal. The Ralbag brings several quotes throughout the Bible to prove this point.
4) The Term Ruach is also equivocal. He brings many pasukim to prove this point.
5) The term Rakia refers to anything that is beaten or flattened out, but sill retains its form. In our instance it looks like Rakia refers to the heavenly body.
6) The Ralbag also says that anything that does not remain in one state is referred to as water.
7) The Ralbag says, "The generation of the Universe by G-D occurred in no time. This is why our Rabbis maintain that the heavens and the earth were created simultaneously... It is therefore evident that the description of the creation as being completed in six days is not to be construed as implying that the first day precedes the second, for example, by one [whole] day [ie twenty four hour period]. Rather, they said, this is in order to show the priority amongst various created things...Now, the elements are prior to that which is generated from them according to material priority, and the compounds of the elements are also related to each other by this kind of priority. For example, the plant is prior to the animal.
8) An amazing idea here in the Ralbag is that G-D actually created the luminaries (the sun and moon) on the first day, but their relationship to the Earth was not solidified until the fourth day. Also, according to the Ralbag, "whatever can be generated naturally according to the natur given to it by G-D is such that its creation is not attributed directly to G-D in the marvelous account of creation; for He produces such things through nature. Hence, the generation of plants and animal through putrefaction and from species other than their own[ie hybrids] is not attributable to G-D."
The truth is that the Ralbag does an amazing job describing how creation came about and how everything he says is what the text says. However, I can not quote him word for word here, otherwise that would be a copyright violation. I suggest getting the english version of the Ralbags Wars of the Lord translated by Seymor Feldman. It is an eye opening book and will answer many doubts you have about Judaism vis-a-vis science. He helps explain the text and just the fundamental belief in Judaims. Also, his commentary on the Torah is quite enlightening.
Any questions that people ask through evolution, I think, can be answered by the Ralbag's interpretation, at least indirectly. So if anyone tells you that science contradicts the Bible, just go ahead and look it up in the Ralbag and most questions will be answered.
I think this is often how people think that science contradicts the Bible. I mean, is it possible since G-D can do anything that science is entirely wrong? Yeah, I think it is possible, but why would G-D do that? Why wouldn't He just follow the laws of nature to create everything? What was the point of creating nature if He wasn't going to follow it as much as possible? This is the Ralbag's idea, that whenever possible we try to describe the events in the Bible as natural occurrences.
1)The Ralbag says that the term "earth" (eretz in hebrew) is equivocal. Meaning that it does not have just one simple meaning of the planet Earth. (I believe this is how the Rambam understands it as well)
2) The phrases of Tohu Ubohu (Unformed and void) means something much deeper than astonishingly empty. The Ralbag says that Tohu means the final form. He brings a description why, but for our purposes that is unimportant. What is important is what does "final form" mean. The way it seems to be described is similar to the form of a chair that a craftsman is making, before he even starts making it. Meaning, it is the thought before any act of creation. Just like a man who wants to make something first has to figure out what it is going to look like, that is what Tohu means, the form that a thought provides for an actual physical creation.
Bohu is the first physical matter of any creation. The Ralbag uses this description because the Universe was full of eternally existent matter. It was full of chaos and disorder before creation began and this is why the Ralbag explains Tohu and Bohu this way, because G-D eternally exists, providing the Tohu (The thought of how creation should be) and Bohu eternally exists (The physical matter). This is the Ralbag's idea and if you want to understand it further just ask me to explain more deeply. He holds of the idea that creation was the creation of something from something.
3)Also, the terms of "light" and "dark" are equivocal. The Ralbag brings several quotes throughout the Bible to prove this point.
4) The Term Ruach is also equivocal. He brings many pasukim to prove this point.
5) The term Rakia refers to anything that is beaten or flattened out, but sill retains its form. In our instance it looks like Rakia refers to the heavenly body.
6) The Ralbag also says that anything that does not remain in one state is referred to as water.
7) The Ralbag says, "The generation of the Universe by G-D occurred in no time. This is why our Rabbis maintain that the heavens and the earth were created simultaneously... It is therefore evident that the description of the creation as being completed in six days is not to be construed as implying that the first day precedes the second, for example, by one [whole] day [ie twenty four hour period]. Rather, they said, this is in order to show the priority amongst various created things...Now, the elements are prior to that which is generated from them according to material priority, and the compounds of the elements are also related to each other by this kind of priority. For example, the plant is prior to the animal.
8) An amazing idea here in the Ralbag is that G-D actually created the luminaries (the sun and moon) on the first day, but their relationship to the Earth was not solidified until the fourth day. Also, according to the Ralbag, "whatever can be generated naturally according to the natur given to it by G-D is such that its creation is not attributed directly to G-D in the marvelous account of creation; for He produces such things through nature. Hence, the generation of plants and animal through putrefaction and from species other than their own[ie hybrids] is not attributable to G-D."
The truth is that the Ralbag does an amazing job describing how creation came about and how everything he says is what the text says. However, I can not quote him word for word here, otherwise that would be a copyright violation. I suggest getting the english version of the Ralbags Wars of the Lord translated by Seymor Feldman. It is an eye opening book and will answer many doubts you have about Judaism vis-a-vis science. He helps explain the text and just the fundamental belief in Judaims. Also, his commentary on the Torah is quite enlightening.
Any questions that people ask through evolution, I think, can be answered by the Ralbag's interpretation, at least indirectly. So if anyone tells you that science contradicts the Bible, just go ahead and look it up in the Ralbag and most questions will be answered.
Sunday, October 18, 2009
Reading of Black Sea Flood II
Here is the continuation of the reading of the Bible (or Torah as we call it in Hebrew) Genesis (8:1-22)
1) And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;
-The waters had finally equalized between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. This caused the extra water that had overflowed from the basin onto the dry land to recede back into the basin.
2) the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained.
-As stated before this means the massive amounts of water stopped rushing in to the Black Sea basin.
3) And the waters returned from off the earth continually; and after the end of a hundred and fifty days the waters decreased.
-The overflowing water that rushed onto the land around the Black Sea basin was receding.
4) And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
-The Ark hit an area of highland in the Sea and was stuck while it was still surrounded by water.
5) And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.
-In the distance, Noach could see the waters receding to the point that land was now visible.
6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made.
-In the middle of the eleventh month Noach decide to see how far they were from the shore.
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
-The Raven kept flying around the Ark until the waters had completely dried and settled in the Black Sea basin.
8) And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground.
-Noach saw that the Raven was not flying towards the dry land so he took another bird and hoped that bird would fly and see if the land was the same land that they had departed from.
9) But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth; and he put forth his hand, and took her, and brought her in unto him into the ark.
-The entire Back Sea basin had been destroyed, that means their previous home. The dove was not able to find any semblance that remained. This is what the pasuk is teaching us, that the entire land where their civilization had lived was destroyed and the dove could not find any part of it that remained.
10) And he stayed yet another seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark.
-I think, that the reason he waited seven days was because he was mourning the destruction of his entire civilization. His entire land was destroyed, along with everyone he knew. This is why Noach waited seven days, because the dove had proven that his entire country had been laid waste and he was mourning for them.
11) And the dove came in to him at eventide; and lo in her mouth an olive-leaf freshly plucked; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
-This pasuk really strikes home my point. It is impossible for a dove to not be able to find land and then seven days later the dove comes back with a leaf. A leaf shows that the tree had been growing life. If the tree had been completely submerged in water, even seven days ago, it would be impossible that seven days later it would have a leaf. This is why I think the dove was looking for its previous home and could not find even a semblance of it.
12) And he stayed yet another seven days; and sent forth the dove; and she returned not again unto him any more.
-This time the seven days were a celebration like the seven days of shevah brachos. It was so happy that he could start a new and that this new land would be an acceptable home that could grow the same plants and trees as the old home. Also, the dove went to start its life over again as well.
13) And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and behold, the face of the ground was dried.
-The waters had receded back into the Black Sea basin far enough that Noach's ark was ALMOST on dry land.
14) And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dry. {S}
-It was at this point that the waters had completely receded into the Black Sea basin as we know them today. This is why G-D tells Noach to leave the Ark since it was at the new shoreline.
15) And God spoke unto Noah, saying:
16) 'Go forth from the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.
17) Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee of all flesh, both fowl, and cattle, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may swarm in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.'
-The species that he brought with him were supposed to populate this area of the world.
18) And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him;
19) every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, whatsoever moveth upon the earth, after their families; went forth out of the ark.
-This is referring to all of the animals that were on the Ark. None of them stayed on the Ark is the point.
20) And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar.
-Every clean animal that was on the Ark with him.
21) And the LORD smelled the sweet savour; and the LORD said in His heart: 'I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
-G-D does not want to have to destroy a civilization again like he destroyed the civilization of Noach.
22) While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.'
-This pasuk might be used by some to say that the flood must have been supernatural. Scripture even says that nature was changed during the flood. However, I think it might just be talking about the natural disasters that occurred, aka a natural disaster that will wipe out a whole civilization.
If you made it this far and still have questions and think I did a bad Job, remember this: The whole story is from Noach's viewpoint if we view this as a local flood. That should be able to answer most questions that might be left. Everything is stated as global because this is what Noach knew. There were animals and even civilizations in other parts of the world, but the bible is focusing on this civilization because of Noach and how he was able to overcome his debased society.
1) And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;
-The waters had finally equalized between the Mediterranean and the Black Sea. This caused the extra water that had overflowed from the basin onto the dry land to recede back into the basin.
2) the fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained.
-As stated before this means the massive amounts of water stopped rushing in to the Black Sea basin.
3) And the waters returned from off the earth continually; and after the end of a hundred and fifty days the waters decreased.
-The overflowing water that rushed onto the land around the Black Sea basin was receding.
4) And the ark rested in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Ararat.
-The Ark hit an area of highland in the Sea and was stuck while it was still surrounded by water.
5) And the waters decreased continually until the tenth month; in the tenth month, on the first day of the month, were the tops of the mountains seen.
-In the distance, Noach could see the waters receding to the point that land was now visible.
6 And it came to pass at the end of forty days, that Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made.
-In the middle of the eleventh month Noach decide to see how far they were from the shore.
7 And he sent forth a raven, and it went forth to and fro, until the waters were dried up from off the earth.
-The Raven kept flying around the Ark until the waters had completely dried and settled in the Black Sea basin.
8) And he sent forth a dove from him, to see if the waters were abated from off the face of the ground.
-Noach saw that the Raven was not flying towards the dry land so he took another bird and hoped that bird would fly and see if the land was the same land that they had departed from.
9) But the dove found no rest for the sole of her foot, and she returned unto him to the ark, for the waters were on the face of the whole earth; and he put forth his hand, and took her, and brought her in unto him into the ark.
-The entire Back Sea basin had been destroyed, that means their previous home. The dove was not able to find any semblance that remained. This is what the pasuk is teaching us, that the entire land where their civilization had lived was destroyed and the dove could not find any part of it that remained.
10) And he stayed yet another seven days; and again he sent forth the dove out of the ark.
-I think, that the reason he waited seven days was because he was mourning the destruction of his entire civilization. His entire land was destroyed, along with everyone he knew. This is why Noach waited seven days, because the dove had proven that his entire country had been laid waste and he was mourning for them.
11) And the dove came in to him at eventide; and lo in her mouth an olive-leaf freshly plucked; so Noah knew that the waters were abated from off the earth.
-This pasuk really strikes home my point. It is impossible for a dove to not be able to find land and then seven days later the dove comes back with a leaf. A leaf shows that the tree had been growing life. If the tree had been completely submerged in water, even seven days ago, it would be impossible that seven days later it would have a leaf. This is why I think the dove was looking for its previous home and could not find even a semblance of it.
12) And he stayed yet another seven days; and sent forth the dove; and she returned not again unto him any more.
-This time the seven days were a celebration like the seven days of shevah brachos. It was so happy that he could start a new and that this new land would be an acceptable home that could grow the same plants and trees as the old home. Also, the dove went to start its life over again as well.
13) And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, the first day of the month, the waters were dried up from off the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark, and looked, and behold, the face of the ground was dried.
-The waters had receded back into the Black Sea basin far enough that Noach's ark was ALMOST on dry land.
14) And in the second month, on the seven and twentieth day of the month, was the earth dry. {S}
-It was at this point that the waters had completely receded into the Black Sea basin as we know them today. This is why G-D tells Noach to leave the Ark since it was at the new shoreline.
15) And God spoke unto Noah, saying:
16) 'Go forth from the ark, thou, and thy wife, and thy sons, and thy sons' wives with thee.
17) Bring forth with thee every living thing that is with thee of all flesh, both fowl, and cattle, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth; that they may swarm in the earth, and be fruitful, and multiply upon the earth.'
-The species that he brought with him were supposed to populate this area of the world.
18) And Noah went forth, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him;
19) every beast, every creeping thing, and every fowl, whatsoever moveth upon the earth, after their families; went forth out of the ark.
-This is referring to all of the animals that were on the Ark. None of them stayed on the Ark is the point.
20) And Noah builded an altar unto the LORD; and took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar.
-Every clean animal that was on the Ark with him.
21) And the LORD smelled the sweet savour; and the LORD said in His heart: 'I will not again curse the ground any more for man's sake; for the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth; neither will I again smite any more every thing living, as I have done.
-G-D does not want to have to destroy a civilization again like he destroyed the civilization of Noach.
22) While the earth remaineth, seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat, and summer and winter, and day and night shall not cease.'
-This pasuk might be used by some to say that the flood must have been supernatural. Scripture even says that nature was changed during the flood. However, I think it might just be talking about the natural disasters that occurred, aka a natural disaster that will wipe out a whole civilization.
If you made it this far and still have questions and think I did a bad Job, remember this: The whole story is from Noach's viewpoint if we view this as a local flood. That should be able to answer most questions that might be left. Everything is stated as global because this is what Noach knew. There were animals and even civilizations in other parts of the world, but the bible is focusing on this civilization because of Noach and how he was able to overcome his debased society.
Reading of Black Sea Flood I
The bible describes how the flood occurred in Genesis (7:11-24) translated by mechon-mamre.org:
11) "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened."
The Torah uses the phrase "broke open" to describe how the flood waters came onto the "earth" and this is a great description for the Black Sea Flood. This is because the wall of earth that was keeping the mediterranean sea waters out broke and water started gushing into the Black Sea basin. Also, the phrase "the windows of heaven were opened" doesn't necessarily mean rain. The Ralbag says that there was no rain and this just describes and enormous amount of water that flooded the "earth." This could be because when the water came rushing in it resembled a giant waterfall from above that came down upon the basin.
12) "And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights."
Again, this does not mean literal rain, but just the jet of water that was flowing from the mediterranean into the Black Sea basin, around 100m. This took 40 days and nights to fill to the point that the jet no longer resembled rain.
13) "In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark."
14)" they, and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after its kind, and every fowl after its kind, every bird of every sort."
This refers to all the animals on the "earth." The "earth" refers to the land of the Black Sea basin. This is because the Black Sea basin was the only area where man lived, or "earth" was referring to the country of Noach. Also, the animals had already gone onto the Ark, they did not all enter on one day. The pasuk is just letting us know that they had all completed their coming on that day.
15)" And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life."
16)" And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God commanded him; and the LORD shut him in."
Again, these two pasukim are referring to all the animals of the "earth." This refers to the land of the country of Noach.
17) "And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it was lifted up above the earth."
This reenforces the idea. Here it does not say that it rained for forty days, but rather that the flood waters were upon the earth for forty days. Also, the Ark was raised by these waters up and up from the black sea's bottom upward.
18)" And the waters prevailed, and increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters."
19)"And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered."
This can either be the mountains of ice melting, which could have been the cause for the flood, or it could be referring to the walls of the Black Sea basin that became covered by the flood waters. The whole heavens would be the whole heavens above the "earth."
20) "Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered."
This can refer to the fact that the coastal areas around the Black Sea were also flooded and that could have been around 15 cubits inland or above the shore of the land. Or it could be referring to the ice that melted and how much that caused the sea level to rise.
21) "And all flesh perished that moved upon the earth, both fowl, and cattle, and beast, and every swarming thing that swarmeth upon the earth, and every man;"
Everything in the Black Sea was killed. This refers to the "earth," the land of the Black Sea basin.
22)" all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, whatsoever was in the dry land, died."
The reason it says this is because the black sea had a lake in the middle of the basin where the marine life in there could have survived. However, everything that was on dry land was killed by drowning.
23) "And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl of the heaven; and they were blotted out from the earth; and Noah only was left, and they that were with him in the ark."
Even the birds that dwelled inside the basin were captured under the water since the water rose so fast and the jet of water was so powerful.
24) "And the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred and fifty days."
The waters rose for 150 days and then reached their peak and then the mediterranean stopped flowing into the Black Sea basin.
11) "In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, on the seventeenth day of the month, on the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened."
The Torah uses the phrase "broke open" to describe how the flood waters came onto the "earth" and this is a great description for the Black Sea Flood. This is because the wall of earth that was keeping the mediterranean sea waters out broke and water started gushing into the Black Sea basin. Also, the phrase "the windows of heaven were opened" doesn't necessarily mean rain. The Ralbag says that there was no rain and this just describes and enormous amount of water that flooded the "earth." This could be because when the water came rushing in it resembled a giant waterfall from above that came down upon the basin.
12) "And the rain was upon the earth forty days and forty nights."
Again, this does not mean literal rain, but just the jet of water that was flowing from the mediterranean into the Black Sea basin, around 100m. This took 40 days and nights to fill to the point that the jet no longer resembled rain.
13) "In the selfsame day entered Noah, and Shem, and Ham, and Japheth, the sons of Noah, and Noah's wife, and the three wives of his sons with them, into the ark."
14)" they, and every beast after its kind, and all the cattle after their kind, and every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth after its kind, and every fowl after its kind, every bird of every sort."
This refers to all the animals on the "earth." The "earth" refers to the land of the Black Sea basin. This is because the Black Sea basin was the only area where man lived, or "earth" was referring to the country of Noach. Also, the animals had already gone onto the Ark, they did not all enter on one day. The pasuk is just letting us know that they had all completed their coming on that day.
15)" And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh wherein is the breath of life."
16)" And they that went in, went in male and female of all flesh, as God commanded him; and the LORD shut him in."
Again, these two pasukim are referring to all the animals of the "earth." This refers to the land of the country of Noach.
17) "And the flood was forty days upon the earth; and the waters increased, and bore up the ark, and it was lifted up above the earth."
This reenforces the idea. Here it does not say that it rained for forty days, but rather that the flood waters were upon the earth for forty days. Also, the Ark was raised by these waters up and up from the black sea's bottom upward.
18)" And the waters prevailed, and increased greatly upon the earth; and the ark went upon the face of the waters."
19)"And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered."
This can either be the mountains of ice melting, which could have been the cause for the flood, or it could be referring to the walls of the Black Sea basin that became covered by the flood waters. The whole heavens would be the whole heavens above the "earth."
20) "Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains were covered."
This can refer to the fact that the coastal areas around the Black Sea were also flooded and that could have been around 15 cubits inland or above the shore of the land. Or it could be referring to the ice that melted and how much that caused the sea level to rise.
21) "And all flesh perished that moved upon the earth, both fowl, and cattle, and beast, and every swarming thing that swarmeth upon the earth, and every man;"
Everything in the Black Sea was killed. This refers to the "earth," the land of the Black Sea basin.
22)" all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, whatsoever was in the dry land, died."
The reason it says this is because the black sea had a lake in the middle of the basin where the marine life in there could have survived. However, everything that was on dry land was killed by drowning.
23) "And He blotted out every living substance which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and creeping thing, and fowl of the heaven; and they were blotted out from the earth; and Noah only was left, and they that were with him in the ark."
Even the birds that dwelled inside the basin were captured under the water since the water rose so fast and the jet of water was so powerful.
24) "And the waters prevailed upon the earth a hundred and fifty days."
The waters rose for 150 days and then reached their peak and then the mediterranean stopped flowing into the Black Sea basin.
Black Sea Flood
There are three basic ways to explain the flood while also taking in account science. One is to use scientific sources and work that into scripture. Another is to utilize scientific sources to an extent and then use scripture to modify it. Finally, one can just use the Bible and show how science was different back then.
Here is the first approach. I am going to use scientific sources that are widely accepted to show how the flood could have happened.
There is a dispute among modern scientists (not dealing with creationists) about how the Black Sea flooded. The first report that came out was in 1996 by Drs Ryan and Pitman, here is their idea summed up by the Earth Institute of Columbia University, "Ryan and Pitman theorized that the sealed Bosporus strait, which acted as a dam between the Mediterranean and Black seas, broke open when climatic warming at the close of the last glacial period caused icecaps to melt, raising the global sea level. With more than 200 times the force of Niagara Falls, the thundering water flooded the Black Sea, then no more than a large lake, raising its surface up to six inches per day and swallowing 60,000 square miles in less than a year. As the Mediterranean salt water replaced fresh water, it expelled a wave of human migration from what had been an oasis of fresh water within very arid lands."
In 1999 an explorer by the name of Robert Ballard, made famous because of his discovery of the Titanic, went looking for evidence for Ryan and Pitman's idea. In National Geographic magazine it says, "During the 1999 expedition, Ballard’s team discovered a submerged ancient shoreline with a flat beach area beneath about 550 feet(168 meters) of water—evidence supporting Ryan and Pittman’s theory." However, this was not the best part of his trip. He realized that "Radiocarbon dating and paleontological evidence from a sample of shells and sediment collected from the site suggested that a massive flood occur ed about 7,500 years ago. However, carbon dating using marine life is notoriously vague. Dates can be off by several hundred years. Dating a sample of wood from the site would provide a much-needed confirmation for Pitman and Ryan’s proposed flood date." This led him to keep searching for man made structures.
The National geographic article exclaims, "Early last week, (this article appeared in September 13, 2000) using the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) Argus, Ballard’s team spotted a rectangular feature about 12 meters (13 yards) long and 4 meters (4.4 yards) wide at the intersection of two ancient inland river channels . It appeared to be made of wood. Though intrigued, they were forced to wait for the arrival of the more nimble ROV Little Hercules, whose superior video capability enabled the crew to get closer to the structure and get a much clearer look.
Through Little Hercules’ robotic eyes, on Friday the team looked again at the mysterious structure, and confirmed it was a type of dwelling. 'The building [has] carved wooden beams, wooden branches, and stone tools collapsed among the mud matrix of the structure,' Ballard said.
Archaeologist Hiebert noted the presence of a stone axe, which looked exactly like one in a Sinop archaeology museum, located just 40 miles (64 kilometers) from the find.
The structure was likely made of wattle and daub—a framework of wooden sticks covered with mud or clay. This type of construction, with wood supports sunk firmly into the ground, would account for the fact that the wood was not carried away by floodwaters. As the waters rose, the mud probably melted away, leaving the wooden 'bones' behind."
Unfortunately, later it came out that "Scientists who in the summer of 2003 visited the underwater site off the northern Turkish coastal town of Sinop couldn’t arrive at any conclusions. The settlement, about 330 feet (100 meters) underwater, was 'contaminated' by wood that had drifted in, foiling any attempt to accurately date the ruin — and thus date the flood.
'We were not able to get a smoking gun,' said Robert Ballard, the underwater explorer and discoverer of the Titanic, who led the $5 million Black Sea expedition.
But the trip was successful nonetheless, and the scientists are preparing to publish their findings early next year.
Ballard heralded the work of Hercules, an underwater excavator that was used for the first time. The 7-foot (2.1-meter) robot gingerly dug around the deep-water ruins and retrieved artifacts using pincers outfitted with sensors that regulated the pressure they exerted — much like a human hand."
However, recently there have been studies done, like the one in 2003 by a man named Aksu, that assume they have disproved this idea of the Black Sea flood. However, as this is an ongoing debate among scientists there have been rebuffs. For example, there is a paper from a french institute that concludes that the flood is very likely and brings proofs that I will not go into. Also, Ryan defends his own theory more recently. Finally, there is a paper that talks about experiments that were conducted to see if a rapid flood was scientifically possible in terms of the water flowing in and how it could have happened that was done recently.
With this in mind, it seems likely that the black sea was filled up with water from the Mediterranean around the time of the flood of Noach could have occurred, as stated by these scientists. I am not saying that this is definitely the flood of Noach, but it is a possibility. What is especially interesting is where people migrated as stated by a research paper recently. Basically, it points out that people migrated all over Europe and the middle east. It also states that several coastal areas where people lived must have been flooded as well because of the rise in sea level that occurred at this time.
With this in mind we are now able to discuss how the words of the Bible can describe this type of flood. Basically, how do we explain a flood that is not global when scripture seemingly describes a global flood. This will be discussed in the next post.
Here is the first approach. I am going to use scientific sources that are widely accepted to show how the flood could have happened.
There is a dispute among modern scientists (not dealing with creationists) about how the Black Sea flooded. The first report that came out was in 1996 by Drs Ryan and Pitman, here is their idea summed up by the Earth Institute of Columbia University, "Ryan and Pitman theorized that the sealed Bosporus strait, which acted as a dam between the Mediterranean and Black seas, broke open when climatic warming at the close of the last glacial period caused icecaps to melt, raising the global sea level. With more than 200 times the force of Niagara Falls, the thundering water flooded the Black Sea, then no more than a large lake, raising its surface up to six inches per day and swallowing 60,000 square miles in less than a year. As the Mediterranean salt water replaced fresh water, it expelled a wave of human migration from what had been an oasis of fresh water within very arid lands."
In 1999 an explorer by the name of Robert Ballard, made famous because of his discovery of the Titanic, went looking for evidence for Ryan and Pitman's idea. In National Geographic magazine it says, "During the 1999 expedition, Ballard’s team discovered a submerged ancient shoreline with a flat beach area beneath about 550 feet(168 meters) of water—evidence supporting Ryan and Pittman’s theory." However, this was not the best part of his trip. He realized that "Radiocarbon dating and paleontological evidence from a sample of shells and sediment collected from the site suggested that a massive flood occur ed about 7,500 years ago. However, carbon dating using marine life is notoriously vague. Dates can be off by several hundred years. Dating a sample of wood from the site would provide a much-needed confirmation for Pitman and Ryan’s proposed flood date." This led him to keep searching for man made structures.
The National geographic article exclaims, "Early last week, (this article appeared in September 13, 2000) using the remotely operated vehicle (ROV) Argus, Ballard’s team spotted a rectangular feature about 12 meters (13 yards) long and 4 meters (4.4 yards) wide at the intersection of two ancient inland river channels . It appeared to be made of wood. Though intrigued, they were forced to wait for the arrival of the more nimble ROV Little Hercules, whose superior video capability enabled the crew to get closer to the structure and get a much clearer look.
Through Little Hercules’ robotic eyes, on Friday the team looked again at the mysterious structure, and confirmed it was a type of dwelling. 'The building [has] carved wooden beams, wooden branches, and stone tools collapsed among the mud matrix of the structure,' Ballard said.
Archaeologist Hiebert noted the presence of a stone axe, which looked exactly like one in a Sinop archaeology museum, located just 40 miles (64 kilometers) from the find.
The structure was likely made of wattle and daub—a framework of wooden sticks covered with mud or clay. This type of construction, with wood supports sunk firmly into the ground, would account for the fact that the wood was not carried away by floodwaters. As the waters rose, the mud probably melted away, leaving the wooden 'bones' behind."
Unfortunately, later it came out that "Scientists who in the summer of 2003 visited the underwater site off the northern Turkish coastal town of Sinop couldn’t arrive at any conclusions. The settlement, about 330 feet (100 meters) underwater, was 'contaminated' by wood that had drifted in, foiling any attempt to accurately date the ruin — and thus date the flood.
'We were not able to get a smoking gun,' said Robert Ballard, the underwater explorer and discoverer of the Titanic, who led the $5 million Black Sea expedition.
But the trip was successful nonetheless, and the scientists are preparing to publish their findings early next year.
Ballard heralded the work of Hercules, an underwater excavator that was used for the first time. The 7-foot (2.1-meter) robot gingerly dug around the deep-water ruins and retrieved artifacts using pincers outfitted with sensors that regulated the pressure they exerted — much like a human hand."
However, recently there have been studies done, like the one in 2003 by a man named Aksu, that assume they have disproved this idea of the Black Sea flood. However, as this is an ongoing debate among scientists there have been rebuffs. For example, there is a paper from a french institute that concludes that the flood is very likely and brings proofs that I will not go into. Also, Ryan defends his own theory more recently. Finally, there is a paper that talks about experiments that were conducted to see if a rapid flood was scientifically possible in terms of the water flowing in and how it could have happened that was done recently.
With this in mind, it seems likely that the black sea was filled up with water from the Mediterranean around the time of the flood of Noach could have occurred, as stated by these scientists. I am not saying that this is definitely the flood of Noach, but it is a possibility. What is especially interesting is where people migrated as stated by a research paper recently. Basically, it points out that people migrated all over Europe and the middle east. It also states that several coastal areas where people lived must have been flooded as well because of the rise in sea level that occurred at this time.
With this in mind we are now able to discuss how the words of the Bible can describe this type of flood. Basically, how do we explain a flood that is not global when scripture seemingly describes a global flood. This will be discussed in the next post.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)