Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله

Noah's Ark Refutation

Rate this topic


Recommended Posts

  • Advanced Member

The Arabic word ard" does not pair one to one with the modern English sense, "The Planet Earth." It carries just as much the sense, "the land," and can be used just as well for a local vicinity as for the earth as a whole, depending on context.

Similarly for the notion of "two of each kind," we can understand that as referring to the different types of common or domestic or herded animals of the area. 

 

Islam from the early days has had a positive attitude toward science, affirming that science is a route to legitimate truth, and that truths derived or discovered there have to be consonant with Divine Revealed Truth. So if science tells you that a global flood is impossible or that you can't fit every animal in the world on a boat, we don't have any theological issues saying, "OK, we have to interpret scripture with these scientific truths in mind."


(salam)
 

Should the Islamic narrative be a Global flood, isn't it possible that it took place during the time the continents were connected in one mass (Pangaea)?

 

That was hundreds of millions of years ago. Even then, not nearly enough water on earth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

The fact that religions in the Ancient Near East had a flood story doesn't prove that this was simply borrowed by the Israelites and utilised as a vehicle to convey a new worldview which we now call Monotheism. Let's not forget that many cultures and religions all share some sort of flood story.

The simplest answer is often the correct one. Why is it so hard to believe Allah revealed this narrative to previous nations in their Revelation before He revealed it to us through the Qur'an or to the Israelites in the Torah?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

1495Screenshot-2013-12-09-20-06-13.png

1. Noah wants no one to survive on the Earth, for if they survive, they will be villainous.

2. All animals were put on the Ark.

Seems like a global flood to me.

1. Firstly, it doesn't say everyone on earth. 71:26 is a Du'a of Noah [a] asking Allah not to let a single Disbeliever remain on earth. Secondly, it's been said by some Commentators that Noah's community was a single community (ie., they were all in a specific region and hadn't spread very far yet since there was only 10 generations between Adam [a] and Noah [a] according to Genesis 5). If I am not mistaken there is also an Aya that makes mention of people splitting up after the time of Noah [a] but I'd need to verify that first. Perhaps I had read it elsewhere.

2. If it was a localised flood it would imply the animals available at the time were taken on board. Keep in mind, this took place roughly only 1000 years after Prophet Adam [a] so to know for certain which animals were taken on board or even which animals existed in the area where Noah [a] lived is hard to say. The Qur'an says two of each kind was taken. That's what we go with.

In case anyone was interested, here is the Qur'anic narrative of the Flood:

http://youtu.be/yA_miimTXeE

Edited by Ali Musaaa :)
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

And who is this dumb lady that nobody knows or even heard of so she can make refutations to a widely recognised historical/religious event that's been set in stone for thousands of years??

Oh and her empirical basis for her problematization is the bible? That's a fabricated text

 

Anyone can argue anything. You don't need to wear a religious garb or a PhD to argue about historical events. 

 

The crucifixion/resurrection of Jesus is purportedly a "widely recognized, set-in-stone" event as well, but as a Muslim you refute it. I have never heard of you, so who are you to refute it? This is the fallacy inherent in the above type of thinking. 

 

In any case, the above posters have made it clear that the Islamic Flood was a local event. 

 

Of course she is going to use the Bible man, she is an ex-Christian anti-theist.

Edited by starlight
Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Anyone can argue anything. You don't need to wear a religious garb or a PhD to argue about historical events.

The crucifixion/resurrection of Jesus is purportedly a "widely recognized, set-in-stone" event as well, but as a Muslim you refute it. I have never heard of you, so who are you to refute it? This is the fallacy inherent in the above type of thinking.

In any case, the above posters have made it clear that the Islamic Flood was a local event.

Of course she is going to use the Bible man, she is an ex-Christian anti-theist.

Are you saying that Muslims believe about Jesus resurrection is refutable because Christians say otherwise? Following their historical resources?

Are you saying that the opinion of the Muslims about the resurrection should be rejected because Muslims are nobody?

What is Quran and what is our prophet value in this debate?

They both are nobody?

You think that our prophet was ill informed?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

A few points on what she said in the video:

 

What kind of idiot would get offended by a film about Noah? If true, it just goes to show how 'tolerant' atheists really are.

 

I doubt anyone is going to use a film as evidence for the Great Flood.

 

She has an issue with the film being portrayed as ficitional. I wonder if she had that issue with the Da Vinci Code, which so many people seem to think has some kind of basis in fact, and actually use it in their arguments against Christianity.

 

Like a typical young atheist moron, she can't stop herself from swearing when talking about religion.

 

If all these other cultures mention a great flood, then maybe, just maybe, there is a common origin to these stories? For instance, an actual flood?

 

Lastly, many Christians would take the flood to be local, and have some arguments to back it up, but she didn't address that point of view at all. Obviously, it's not quite so easy to make fun of.

Edited by Haydar Husayn
Link to post
Share on other sites

Did the animals have there own separate cages? How was it ensured that they behaved?

How about their individual foods? Was there no prey and predator on board? How about finding food after the flood wiped out the living environment?

How was their excrement handled?

What about the freezing cold at high altitudes and lack of oxygen?

What about the genetic diversity? Two animals of the same kind isn't enough. It would be incest all the way down.

Were the specific animals who boarded the ark not found anywhere else throughout the world?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Advanced Member

Anyone have a response to the above problems?

 

Yup, everything, far as I can see, earlier when a few pointed out Muslims are not obligated to believe in some global flood, nor that the ark literally contained all the earth's creatures, nor are any of the finer details something we need to worry about. So, yeah, basically all of this only applies to literalist Christians.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Veteran Member

Did the animals have there own separate cages? How was it ensured that they behaved?

How about their individual foods? Was there no prey and predator on board? How about finding food after the flood wiped out the living environment?

How was their excrement handled?

What about the freezing cold at high altitudes and lack of oxygen?

What about the genetic diversity? Two animals of the same kind isn't enough. It would be incest all the way down.

Were the specific animals who boarded the ark not found anywhere else throughout the world?

 

ummm If God is the originator of everything, I dont think these minor details would pose a problem o_O

Regardless of the Islamic interpretation...

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...