Prophet Noah and The Flood...

[Grace Seeker]

Assalamualaikum

I am not sure if anyone is aware of this but in the 17th,18th and 19th Centuries the British used the story of Noah as an excuse for the disgusting slave trade!!!!

According to the Bible the story goes further with regards to Nuh(as) I dont even want to say as it is not nice. Anyway I checked it out with a scholar(Dr Khalid Khan) who advised there is no such thing in Islam, alhamdulillah. I felt good that what I had felt all along was supported by Islam.

I was in complete disbelief when my history lecturer conducted a seminar on this topic!

Yeah, you are right. It is both a sad tale with regard to Noah and his family after the flood and an even sadder bit of history which your properly report and which, IMO, the interpreters of the 17th-19th centuries improperly concluded. Of course, we must remember there were also many in the Church (John Wesley, William Wilberforce, Granville, Sharp, Charles G. Finney) who stood squarely against the slave trade. But men loved money more than what was right and (again IMO) they would pervert and twist the scriptures to accomplish their own ends.

The saddest of all, I still see this same thing happening today, just on other issues.

 

[جوري]

I said what I said. It is there for everyone to read. I believe my posts have been entirely consistent with one another and also with simply setting forth what the Bible actually says throughout this thread. If you see it differently that is your option, but it is an erroneous conclusion seeded in your hatred of all things Christian. Not even the posts you quote to make your point are antithetical to each other.

You are right indeed, it is there for all to see, especially so after quoting you!

Says you.

I gather you can't reconcile that with the nature of the self-immolating all loving man-god?

Again, says you. But you are not the authority on what God can or cannot do. God is.

Actually, it is but mere hypocrisy on your part, you allege the self-immolating god is all about love and peace, it makes for a nice narnia tale but what about the reality of things? how does your sermons on the loving god reconcile with the god who ****ed all giving no warning and sending one righteous man to save only his family?

Further I all of this is because you made this statement:The parenthetical statement "Noah was sent to his folks not (all of man kind)" implies that you are responding to the suggestion that Noah was sent to all of mankind. I challenged you then and, since it went unaswered, I challenge you now:I saw no post prior to yours suggesting that Noah had been sent to all of mankind. Nor do I see anything in the Bible to suggest that Noah was sent to all of mankind. So, where do you come from in making such a statement out of the blue? You post in response to something that no one has even said. And you have the audacity to call my post inconsequential. :giggling:

Not at all, I think if god is ****ing the world with a global flood notice that is your religious stand with your aggrieved god over the evil of mankind, that he'd do the godly thing and send fair warning to all.. in the Quran I have quoted several times that he was sent 'to his people' doesn't make the flood global, nor does it make Noah a man with no message, he in fact had a message and those who ignored it including his own son got punished..
and of course your posts are inconsequential and very loopy at best!


good luck with all of that

peace

 

[Grace Seeker]

I suppose many of my posts are inconsequential. But, Skye, are there no consequences to your integrity as an honest critiquer of other faiths when you once again fail to be able to back up your allusion to your inference that someone said Noah was sent to all mankind? Why do you imply that someone had said it when in fact it never was suggested by anyone but you?

 

[جوري]

I suppose many of my posts are inconsequential. But, Skye, are there no consequences to your integrity as an honest critiquer of other faiths when you once again fail to be able to back up your allusion to your inference that someone said Noah was sent to all mankind? Why do you imply that someone had said it when in fact it never was suggested by anyone but you?

Don't you think it makes it worst by your account to unleash a global flood and send just one 'righteous man' to his 'family'?

I think you keep missing the point with every post that I have lost interest in this thread all together..instead of simply admitting the oddness of the whole event you'd rather the circuitous route where you fail to pay attention to what yourself have written!

all the best

 

[Grace Seeker]

Don't you think it makes it worst by your account to unleash a global flood and send just one 'righteous man' to his 'family'?

Now you ask me for my opinion? That is a completely different thing than before, and something I have intentionally not shared so as to avoid interpretation clouding the issue.

The point that you keep missing (or I believe avoiding, for I don't think you to be so obtuse) is that you made a statement implying something to be so that simply wasn't and isn't true. When you show me that you can back up the implication you made in your own statement, "Noah was sent to his folks not (all of man kind)," that someone had introduced this subject matter of Noah being sent to all of mankind prior to you mentioning it, then and only then will I share what my opinion is. Until then, please, let's stick to what was actually said without the extraneous interpretations of people who don't even believe what was written in the first place.

 

[جوري]

Now you ask me for my opinion? That is a completely different thing than before, and something I have intentionally not shared so as to avoid interpretation clouding the issue.

The point that you keep missing (or I believe avoiding, for I don't think you to be so obtuse) is that you made a statement implying something to be so that simply wasn't and isn't true. When you show me that you can back up the implication you made in your own statement, "Noah was sent to his folks not (all of man kind)," that someone had introduced this subject matter of Noah being sent to all of mankind prior to you mentioning it, then and only then will I share what my opinion is. Until then, please, let's stick to what was actually said without the extraneous interpretations of people who don't even believe what was written in the first place.

I have no interest in your opinion-- I have interest in how you reconcile what you said with what is written as per bible.. if the point is lost to you then just read the past 4984388698 posts on the matter.. It hasn't been watered down by your obstinate need for clangorous humbug..is it that you are simply unwilling to address points brought up or unable to?
I don't want to protract this for another 50 pages.. if you can't or don't want to just simply say so and don't waste your time or anyone else's....

all the best

all the best

 

[Grace Seeker]

I have no interest in your opinion--

Really? That's not evident from your prior posts:

Don't you think ...

I have interest in how you reconcile what you said with what is written as per bible..

What I have said is easy to reconcile with what is written in the Bible:

The only things that Noah is specifically told to do are:
(1) build an arc (and he was also told how to build it)
(2) let the animals representing all of the birds and land animals come to him
(3) take food for all of these animals on the arc
(4) get his family on it

Supposedly, on the arc, were "male and female of all flesh" (Genesis 7:16). These were kept safe on the arc, while outside the arc:

These things are each mentioned in the Bible. To say more than this, to say that the Bible has Noah sent to all of mankind, is what is hard to reconcile for nowhere is that actually mentioned in the text, it is something you have inferred from it. Whether your inference is correct or not is not discernable from the text itself but is based on your OPINION that the godly thing to do is send a warning:

I think if god is ****ing the world with a global flood notice that is your religious stand with your aggrieved god over the evil of mankind, that he'd do the godly thing and send fair warning to all.

However a sovereign God is not constrained to act in accordance with your opinion. No where in this or any other text do we see that God must send such a warning. Further, since scripture tells us:

Romans 1

18The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, 19since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them. 20For since the creation of the world God's invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse.

We have this testimony that no one is without excuse, that we all have God's revelation of what is righteous and what is wicked. God does not need to warn us that he is going to punish our wickedness. He is fully within his rights as creator and sovereign Lord of the universe to simply stamp out wickedness whenver and wherever he sees it occurring. And that appears to be exactly what the Bible records that God did in the case of the people of the earth in Noah's day.

 

[جوري]

Really? That's not evident from your prior posts:

Given your inability to remember what you yourself have written, thus leading me to quote you again and again, I'd say you are very ill-equipped at deciphering basic dialogue.. except of course I know you do it on purpose as it is the defense of a man with no ammo!

You have stretched this too thin and there isn't much left to say or embellish.. indeed, you can't reconcile the nature of your god with his doings and that is the bottom line of the thousand word essay..

thank you..

all the best

 

[Grace Seeker]

Given your inability to remember what you yourself have written, thus leading me to quote you again and again, .... indeed, you can't reconcile the nature of your god with his doings and that is the bottom line of the thousand word essay..

thank you..

all the best

I remain clear as to what I have said, and have no problem reconciling my understanding of God with those statements.

As to the length of this thread, it has all along been determined primarily by your own inability to substantiate the inferences you have drawn and subsequent attempts at deflection when challenged to do so. But I agree our back and forth banter is pointless. So, unless you care to actually give a reason for suggesting that someone had claimed that Noah was sent to all men, this thread is going to have just one more post in it -- the one you will no doubt be unable to keep yourself from making in reply to this one.

 

[جوري]

I remain clear as to what I have said, and have no problem reconciling my understanding of God with those statements.

As to the length of this thread, it has all along been determined primarily by your own inability to substantiate the inferences you have drawn and subsequent attempts at deflection when challenged to do so. But I agree our back and forth banter is pointless. blah blah.

I don't care to give any reasoning, as far as I am concerned you were asked concise questions in plain English and failed to give a satisfactory response.. me entering the same questions on every thread and you writing unrelated drivel doesn't equate to a deflection on my part rather failure on your part to deliver a sensical piece as relates to the topic. But you can tell yourself whatever you want to get through this!

all the best

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

I didn't say anything about a flood, I said he was sent to 'his people' as per Quran.. nothing more nothing less on the subject..

I was under the impression that you believed that there were other people besides his, that existed at that time, who weren't effected by the flood.

 

[جوري]

I was under the impression that you believed that there were other people besides his, that existed at that time, who weren't effected by the flood.

My understanding as per Quran is that he was sent only to his people (qawmihi), that the flood was localized to an area and a people and wasn't global as per bible and where to a flood of that caliber he appears to be sent to save 'his family' and a few animals.

all the best

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

My understanding as per Quran is that he was sent only to his people (qawmihi), that the flood was localized to an area and a people and wasn't global as per bible and where to a flood of that caliber he appears to be sent to save 'his family' and a few animals.

all the best

Then why does the Qur'an say in 37:77 that it was only the progeny of Prophet Nuh that endured on the earth afterward?

This is also confirmed in ahadith, stating that the descendants of Nuh's 3 sons make up the different peoples of the Earth today.

 

[جوري]

Then why does the Qur'an say in 37:77 that it was only the progeny of Prophet Nuh that endured on the earth afterward?

This is also confirmed in ahadith, stating that the descendants of Nuh's 3 sons make up the different peoples of the Earth today.

I don't see how this is at odds to anything I said? as I have written on the previous page and I quote:

1- I believe what the Quran teaches on the matter and not my own whims.. we have no idea how many of them there were?

Obama is president to his people, but his people are a good 300,000 million?

perhaps this is all occurred before a continental drift. Perhaps his people were all the people there were, who knows? I certainly don't think the Earth looked like it did today, where because the folks in Mesopotamia are refractory Allah swt punishes the folks in Australia. and I certainly don't believe he was sent to his family alone either since that would make God very vengeful and Allah swt doesn't punish a folk without first sending a messenger with glad tidings and a reminder ..

so to be quite honest I am not sure what you are arguing for or against here?

all the best

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

I don't see how this is at odds to anything I said? as I have written on the previous page and I quote:


perhaps this is all occurred before a continental drift. Perhaps his people were all the people there were, who knows? I certainly don't think the Earth looked like it did today, where because the folks in Mesopotamia are refractory Allah swt punishes the folks in Australia. and I certainly don't believe he was sent to his family alone either since that would make God very vengeful and Allah swt doesn't punish a folk without first sending a messenger with glad tidings and a reminder ..

so to be quite honest I am not sure what you are arguing for or against here?

all the best

I'm arguing for a global flood, and that Prophet Nuh's people were everyone at the time.

Prophet Nuh's ark was built on a mountain, and is reported to have sailed from Iraq to Mecca, where it circled the Kaaba, and then sailed to Mt. Judi where it rested.

That's a really large area to be flooded over, and for the waters to reach up over mountains - at the very least - implies a global flood, or at least a very very large regional one.

No doubt the Earth was different then, especially in terms of geography. However, it's hard to believe this occurred before "continental drift".

Pangaea broke up 200 million years ago, giving way to the formation of the Earth's oceanic crust and thus all of the Earth's oceans. This break-up however, was slow, and took place over millions of years. Before then, most (if not all) of the Earth would've been covered by epeiric seas. I'm inclined to think all of this predates the flood (instead of coinciding with it), because of how long the process of change would've been.

 

[Sampharo]

Pangaea is a theory and not exactly proven neither in timeline nor details. However Ibn Kathir book Al-Bidaya Wannihaya has more details on the subject taken from Ibn Abbas and Abdullah Ibn Omar to be collected from different Hadith of the prophet, yet some scholars believe it is not accurate because some Mawdoo and daeef hadith might be mixed in.

According to the book, (across 10 pages or so but I am summarizing here and keeping short whatever was already mentioned earlier) All people were localized in one nation at the time and spoke one language. Noah was their longest living, and spent the majority of 950 years of age in commitment to deliver God's message and trying to get his people to believe, as they had started worshipping their grandparents statues at the behest of Iblis. When he was told by God that no one else now will ever believe, Noah prayed to bring down a punishment and cleanse the Earth of all the disbelievers, for if any survive their progeny will be corrupt and evil (This suggests again that only Noah's people were on Earth, otherwise he would have travelled to other people to tell them rather than spend centuries in one nation). When he finished the ark, he took 80 families of believers who were all who believed (in some versions 72) along with couples of all the animals. When the flood hit they floated for months upon months, and the cats and pigs were created on the ark (Ibn Abbas said that when the mice and rodents bred too fast, God inspired Noah to touch the lion's and lioness's forehead, from which a couple of cats emerged. When filth was unbearable, Noah slapped or struck with a stick at the elephants backsides, and two pigs emerged who ate the waste and filth). This suggests a total immersion if they will spend such amount of time, and strongly again suggests a global flood, otherwise no sea level would be high enough to flood the tips of mountains but stay local without raising the global ocean levels to that same heights. Whether the tips of higher mountains like the himalayan mountains and the Alps were also covered since there were no people there is something for pure speculation. Anyway, when the time came and Noah's supplications to rest ashore were answered, Noah sent a bird (a crow) to find land, but it did not return and he sent another (a pigeon) that came back with mud in its feet. Noah headed to dry land and everyone disembarked. In the morning, the 80 families woke up unable to speak to each other, each of them had a different language and those formed the Earth's nations (unlike the biblical story that mixing of languages happened at Babel), so based on this there were no other people afterwards other than those on the ark.

God knows best

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

Pangaea is a theory and not exactly proven neither in timeline nor details.

Seafloor spreading is fairly proven, and we know that none of the ocean floors today are older than 200 million years. Also, the continents close together perfectly along the mid-ocean ridges.

However Ibn Kathir book Al-Bidaya Wannihaya has more details on the subject taken from Ibn Abbas and Abdullah Ibn Omar to be collected from different Hadith of the prophet, yet some scholars believe it is not accurate because some Mawdoo and daeef hadith might be mixed in.

According to the book, (across 10 pages or so but I am summarizing here and keeping short whatever was already mentioned earlier) All people were localized in one nation at the time and spoke one language. Noah was their longest living, and spent the majority of 950 years of age in commitment to deliver God's message and trying to get his people to believe, as they had started worshipping their grandparents statues at the behest of Iblis. When he was told by God that no one else now will ever believe, Noah prayed to bring down a punishment and cleanse the Earth of all the disbelievers, for if any survive their progeny will be corrupt and evil (This suggests again that only Noah's people were on Earth, otherwise he would have travelled to other people to tell them rather than spend centuries in one nation). When he finished the ark, he took 80 families of believers who were all who believed (in some versions 72) along with couples of all the animals. When the flood hit they floated for months upon months, and the cats and pigs were created on the ark (Ibn Abbas said that when the mice and rodents bred too fast, God inspired Noah to touch the lion's and lioness's forehead, from which a couple of cats emerged. When filth was unbearable, Noah slapped or struck with a stick at the elephants backsides, and two pigs emerged who ate the waste and filth). This suggests a total immersion if they will spend such amount of time, and strongly again suggests a global flood, otherwise no sea level would be high enough to flood the tips of mountains but stay local without raising the global ocean levels to that same heights. Whether the tips of higher mountains like the himalayan mountains and the Alps were also covered since there were no people there is something for pure speculation. Anyway, when the time came and Noah's supplications to rest ashore were answered, Noah sent a bird (a crow) to find land, but it did not return and he sent another (a pigeon) that came back with mud in its feet. Noah headed to dry land and everyone disembarked. In the morning, the 80 families woke up unable to speak to each other, each of them had a different language and those formed the Earth's nations (unlike the biblical story that mixing of languages happened at Babel), so based on this there were no other people afterwards other than those on the ark.

However, it was only the progeny of Prophet Nuh's family that endured on the Earth after the flood, while the progenies of those other families did not. So wouldn't the different languages they spoke have disappeared with their progenies?

 

[جوري]

However, it was only the progeny of Prophet Nuh's family that endured on the Earth after the flood, while the progenies of those other families did not. So wouldn't the different languages they spoke have disappeared with their progenies?

I think you may have misunderstood what it means having his 'progeny endure' which can be taken to denote that it was of his progeny that carried the torch of guidance to the present day through Ibrahim and his descendants up to the Holy Prophet.
Also--and this is speculative on my part, that you may not take every term so literally:

11:45 And noah called out to his Sustainer, and said: "O my Sustainer! Verily, my son was of my family; [67] and, verily, Thy promise always comes true, and Thou art the most just of all judges!"

11:46 [God] answered: "O noah, behold, he was not of thy family, for, verily, he was unrighteous in his conduct. [68] And thou shalt not ask of Me anything whereof thou canst not have any knowledge: [69] thus, behold, do I admonish thee lest thou become one of those who are unaware [of what is right]."


so from that you can infer that his family are 'those who are righteous' not simply genetic offspring!

and Allah swt knows best

 

[muslimapoclyptc]

I think you may misunderstand what it means having his 'progeny endure' which can be taken to denote that it was of his progeny that carried the torch of guidance to the present day through Ibrahim and his descendants up to the Holy Prophet. While the others became regular nations.

Also--and this is speculative on my part, that you may not take every term so literally:

11:45 And noah called out to his Sustainer, and said: "O my Sustainer! Verily, my son was of my family; [67] and, verily, Thy promise always comes true, and Thou art the most just of all judges!"

11:46 [God] answered: "O noah, behold, he was not of thy family, for, verily, he was unrighteous in his conduct. [68] And thou shalt not ask of Me anything whereof thou canst not have any knowledge: [69] thus, behold, do I admonish thee lest thou become one of those who are unaware [of what is right]."


so from that you can infer that his family are 'those who are righteous' not simply genetic offspring!

and Allah swt knows best

Then why do the ahadith specify that it is his offspring?

Also, is there any tafsir that gives your interpretation?

 

[جوري]

Then why do the ahadith specify that it is his offspring?

tell me what you understood from what I have written above!