# Noah and the flood



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 25, 2014)

Been seeing much in regards to the new movie. It occured to me that probably all religions before divirging in different direction, all started with the first 5 books. So whether Muslim, Christian or other, their belief includes the flood. I was thinking about the story of Noah and why God dealt so harshly with Cannan. Here is what I suspect. This first part a known theory, you can google it, the J, E, P and D theory, The YHWH, Elohim, Priest and ? theory says that we had several traditions, oral or written, when someone decided to take these traditions and blend them into one. Lots of good example to make this case. Such as the contridictions of the creation story, The 2 names that God gave us to remember him from generation to generation, etc. This person whom blended the accounts, this is what I think he did. I think he watered down the story of Noah in the tent. Either unknowingly, or possible, intentional. The phrase "looked upon their nakedness" is the same as the modern day "sleeping together". This can be verified by looking at this in other places in the OT. I think Ham came in and found his Father drunk, passed out and and had sexual relations with his Fathers woman. I say "woman" because we don't know who she may have been. The text does not say a woman was present, but bear with me for a momment and lets assume for argument sake. Noah planted a vineyard after having started a new life. How many years does it take to grow grapes to produce wine? Noah could be still with his wife, Hams mother or with another "woman". So why does the story show God taking his vengence on Cannan, Hams son? This is strange. Throughout the generations of God's people, the promise was that God will take all that Cannan accomplishes, his land, his people, his crops, his livestock, his people and all their accomplishments and the entire region, named after the founder, the land of Cannan, take it away and give it to his chosen people. The giving of the "promise land".  Rather harsh judgement to a son of the one whom saw his father naked. So, my thoughts are that the 'blender of the accounts", modified the story. But that the real story was that Cannan was conceived when Ham took advantage of Noah passed out and had sex with his woman. I realize that this is highly controversal..... but the punishment handed down does not support the crime. Something is missing.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 25, 2014)

1gr8bldr said:


> Been seeing much in regards to the new movie. It occured to me that probably all religions before divirging in different direction, all started with the first 5 books. So whether Muslim, Christian or other, their belief includes the flood. I was thinking about the story of Noah and why God dealt so harshly with Cannan. Here is what I suspect. This first part a known theory, you can google it, the J, E, P and D theory, The YHWH, Elohim, Priest and ? theory says that we had several traditions, oral or written, when someone decided to take these traditions and blend them into one. Lots of good example to make this case. Such as the contridictions of the creation story, The 2 names that God gave us to remember him from generation to generation, etc. This person whom blended the accounts, this is what I think he did. I think he watered down the story of Noah in the tent. Either unknowingly, or possible, intentional. The phrase "looked upon their nakedness" is the same as the modern day "sleeping together". This can be verified by looking at this in other places in the OT. I think Ham came in and found his Father drunk, passed out and and had sexual relations with his Fathers woman. I say "woman" because we don't know who she may have been. The text does not say a woman was present, but bear with me for a momment and lets assume for argument sake. Noah planted a vineyard after having started a new life. How many years does it take to grow grapes to produce wine? Noah could be still with his wife, Hams mother or with another "woman". So why does the story show God taking his vengence on Cannan, Hams son? This is strange. Throughout the generations of God's people, the promise was that God will take all that Cannan accomplishes, his land, his people, his crops, his livestock, his people and all their accomplishments and the entire region, named after the founder, the land of Cannan, take it away and give it to his chosen people. The giving of the "promise land".  Rather harsh judgement to a son of the one whom saw his father naked. So, my thoughts are that the 'blender of the accounts", modified the story. But that the real story was that Cannan was conceived when Ham took advantage of Noah passed out and had sex with his woman. I realize that this is highly controversal..... but the punishment handed down does not support the crime. Something is missing.



Just my opinion,but I don't think you can take what is not explained in detail in scripture and create your own reality to fill in the blank.    Don't support preachers when they do it either.  IMHO it's better to say "I don't know." , rather than make up something.


----------



## JB0704 (Mar 25, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Don't support preachers when they do it either.



But, I have heard some interesting sermons on the possibilities of what Jesus wrote in the sand.......

That being said, I agree with your general point.


----------



## 1gr8bldr (Mar 25, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Just my opinion,but I don't think you can take what is not explained in detail in scripture and create your own reality to fill in the blank.    Don't support preachers when they do it either.  IMHO it's better to say "I don't know." , rather than make up something.


I usually take this same stand. But the extreme punishment of a son whose father saw his father naked really throws a red flag that something is missing. But, it could be anything missing, not the story I came up with


----------



## bullethead (Mar 25, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Just my opinion,but I don't think you can take what is not explained in detail in scripture and create your own reality to fill in the blank.    Don't support preachers when they do it either.  IMHO it's better to say "I don't know." , rather than make up something.



Have you read ANY of your own posts on here before you wrote this one? lolololol


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 25, 2014)

JB0704 said:


> But, I have heard some interesting sermons on the possibilities of what Jesus wrote in the sand.......



Meeee too.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 25, 2014)

bullethead said:


> Have you read ANY of your own posts on here before you wrote this one? lolololol



Awwww Bullllllllet.  You haven't spoken to me in so long and you start and end with an with an insult and nothing substantiative between the two.  Guess some things never change.  Stay charming my brother.


----------



## bullethead (Mar 25, 2014)

SemperFiDawg said:


> Awwww Bullllllllet.  You haven't spoken to me in so long and you start and end with an with an insult and nothing substantiative between the two.  Guess some things never change.  Stay charming my brother.



It was a question in good humor, hence the "lololol". If you took it as an insult then it must have had some truth to it. I'll stay charming and you stay assertive.


----------



## SemperFiDawg (Mar 25, 2014)

bullethead said:


> It was a question in good humor, hence the "lololol". If you took it as an insult then it must have had some truth to it. I'll stay charming and you stay assertive.



Yes Sir.


----------

