Talk:Great Flood of Noah
The article asserts that various biblical texts date the flood. None give a date, so this should be re-written. The MT doesn't say c.2300 BCE, the LXX doesn't say 3250 BCE, etc. --Fr Lev 16:14, March 10, 2009 (UTC)
- Agreed. That should be spelled out clearly in the article. The dates are not in the Sciptures but rather from the "World Era" Calendar systems developed by Judaism and Eastern Orthodoxy historically. A qualifier could be provided for example, stating that "according to the Hillel World Era (Judaism) determination, based on the Masoretic text, the flood is placed AROUND 2300 BC", and "according to the Byzantine Creation Era determination, based on the Septuagint, the flood is placed AROUND 3247 BC"...etc.
- As a caveat to this, I agree with the concern Vassiliki has raised; i.e. Is this article representing an official Orthodox view of this subject? I think this subject needs to be developed carefully, and expertly vetted before being published on OW. Suggest taking it offline for now until this can be done. Some subjects, such as this, while important and interesting and a topic of modern interest to be sure, are more of a theme in contemporary creationist circles, than with Orthodoxy.
- The article does not cite any sources either. Would like to see commentary from Orthodox sources and Fathers. Different approaches to the subject can be cited as External links to those articles, for breadth of coverage, such as the Catholic Encyclopedia (New Advents') article on the Deluge.
- Cheers, Angellight 888 17:07, March 10, 2009 (UTC)
- agreed. We have some highly qualified EO theologians who can weave through this story with a golden thread but none of them ever claim that it is the formal position of the EO church ... so to put an article into OW in some ways puts a claim that the article represents an EO POV - this article cleary is not EO ... however, since this is Encyclopedic it does warrant to be here but citation is required and who's POV are being represented. I have to agree with you Chris, I think this is Pro-Creationism angle ...
- the other thing that concerns me, is the dating angle too .. no one can for sure say that they have an accurate understanding of the THE calendar used in those times ... the story of Noah is clearly the first documented "calendar" event - it starts by giving an age of Noah before he builds the ark, spends 100 years building and then reports that on the 27th day of the 2nd month they exited the ark ... a year after they entered ..it is very specific with its timing .. however, what calendar did the people use at the time they wrote the Noah story? So and and so forth .. a very intensely academic exercise and really should have citations since SO many people disagree to the dating! Vasiliki 00:47, March 11, 2009 (UTC)