The Instigator
Pro (for)
6 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

story of noah and the references from those in the NTestament add to discrediting the bible

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 817 times Debate No: 58374
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




the story of noah and the references from those in the NTestament add to discrediting the bible

here is the text,which argues the flood was world wide, and wiped out every creature alive that was not on the boat.

"The clearest verses that show the extent of the flood are Genesis 7:19-23. Regarding the waters, "They rose greatly on the earth, and all the high mountains under the entire heavens were covered. The waters rose and covered the mountains to a depth of more than twenty feet. Every living thing that moved on the earth perished"birds, livestock, wild animals, all the creatures that swarm over the earth, and all mankind. Everything on dry land that had the breath of life in its nostrils died. Every living thing on the face of the earth was wiped out; men and animals and the creatures that move along the ground and the birds of the air were wiped from the earth. Only Noah was left, and those with him in the ark."

Read more:

Matthew 24:37 But as the days of Noah were, so shall also the coming of the Son of man be. For as in the days that were before the flood they were eating and drinking, marrying and giving in marriage, until the day that Noah entered into the ark, And knew not until the flood came, and took them all away; so shall also the coming of the Son of man be."
see also Luke 17:26

clearly, the scientific evidence indicates the flood being global and killing all the animals, was false.

the best a person could argue, is that the story was a myth. and the people of hte new testament didn't necessarily say that it was true that it was a global flood, and that animals were all killed. but they did, however, give credence to the story of noah, a story that is basically a myth. even if the flood wasn't worldwide, it is still said to be in the OTestament. that alone is discrediting.


more reference to noah in the bible: (Isaiah 54:9; 1 Peter 3:20; 2 Peter 2:5; Hebrews 11:7)

""This is like the days of Noah to me: as I swore that the waters of Noah should no more go over the earth, so I have sworn that I will not be angry with you, and will not rebuke you.

"because they formerly did not obey, when God"s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.

"5 if he did not spare the ancient world, but preserved Noah, a herald of righteousness, with seven others, when he brought a flood upon the world of the ungodly;"

"7 By faith Noah, being warned by God concerning events as yet unseen, in reverent fear constructed an ark for the saving of his household. By this he condemned the world and became an heir of the righteousness that comes by faith.


The story of Noah's Ark is not discrediting to the Bible, if anything it it a credit to the mercy of God. The people of that time were committing vile sins and condemning their souls, you must recount the part of the story where Noah searches and can not find 5 good men outside his family. Therefore it was merciful for God to wipe them out before they could corrupt and condemn themselves further. When it states that the flood covered the whole world, it means the whole known world. At the time this meant the Mediterranean world, and there has been evidence that suggest that this area was submerged in water at some point. The Ark itself has also been found in the exact location described in the Bible, it also matches the exact measurements in the Bible and petrified animal dung and antlers where found when drilling into the massive petrified ship. There are many other videos and articles that verify it as the ark.
Debate Round No. 1


that is a plausble argument, the 'known' world.

but it still rests on a questionable event.

"Despite many expeditions, no scientific evidence of the ark has been found

more criticism about what was found there:

"The modern "Mt. Ararat" (Agri Dagh) is a post-Flood volcano. The Ark could not have landed on Agri Dagh because it did not exist at the end of the Flood, and even if it did land on modern Agri Dagh, it would have been destroyed by the many, many eruptions of Ararat since the Flood. You can observe all the fresh lava flows on Agri Dagh at Google Maps."


The fact that the volcano has erupted doesn't change the fact the that it carbon dates back 4,800 years ago and that it matches perfectly with the description in the Bible. These FACTS should be enough to end any speculation, besides who would build such a massive vessel on a mountain so far away from the coast and let animals live in it? This also credits the validity of the Bible. Many different cultures also had their own Great Flood story, for example the Greeks and Babylonians, and most show the same pattern, the human race was corrupt so an omnipotent power sent a flood to wipe them out and saved the only good family. Even Native Americans have a flood story, this is not just a coincidence. These people must have been influenced by a great event in order to all carry such similar traditions throughout the world and it must have been a very dramatic catastrophe in order for the people who drifted away, and formed many different pagan religions, to keep it. Let me remind you that you have still not responded to my first statement.
Debate Round No. 2


that there are so many flood stories, more so challenges the story of the flood, as it shows that it was a largely distributed legend. in examining if it helps the story or not, it is best to examine the timeline, and that shows it doen't help....

"The story of an ancient flood is more ancient than Genesis, says Professor Toumey. A passage from the Sumerian epic Gilgamesh, among the world's oldest known literature, tells of a man named Ziusudra surviving a great flood. The Babylonian version of that story says Utnapishtum survives the flood. The plot was reworked and the name again changed, this time to Noah, in the version in the book of Genesis."

the story appears to have originated out of a pagan religion. could it have been only first known about from a pagan religion, but was noah all along? possible, but it doesn't help give creditbility that it is first known to be a pagan religion.


the carbon dating point is questionable. the wiki link i provided shows a carbon dating from the early 1900s that was later established by two other independant sources to be from 600 ish AD. there the Noah's Ark Ministries International team around 2007 that has been said to have carbon dated the site, and put it at the right age of Noah. however, they admit that they have not had independant tests done.....

"The next step in the discovery, says Wei, is to coordinate with scientists, researchers, and the Turkish government to conduct further studies on the site."

and the local governmet does not know how it would have been possible for them to transport the wood that is said to be discoverd from Turkey to China, given how guarded the area is. they started an investigation, but the lead investigator was found to be missing,with his peronal belongs and effects found, with him no where in site.
the local government welcomes the find, explicitly, as a boost to tourism.

you can see that the issue is shrouded in controversy. something as simple as radio dating should have been corroberated by now, and i dont see it, and there are too many other open questions and utierior motives to suspect this is all a hoax. (not just the local government's self interest, but the fact that it's "noah's ark ministries" and they have been looking for so long, should be troubled by their self interest)

as to the other comments that you wanted me to respond to, i dont know what you are referring to? it is above my pay grade to ask whether God should have committed such a genocide. it strikes me as not something God would do, but i cannot be the best judge of that.

i would also suspect, that if we examined the area of that mountain, that it would not be possible for there to have been such a large flood, as i doubt it is an area that could be self contained, where water wouldn't get other places. and, i doubt that the geology supports the argument there was such a monumental flood. especially when we look at the water needing to be at or above mountain level for the ship to come to rest on. the putative discovery does put the boat on the mountain, and the bible itself says it was up to the mountain tops.


Theistfaithreason forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Sagey 7 years ago
neutral did another Trolling vote Bomb.
No neutral, there is absolutely no evidence for the Great Global Flood of the Bible.
None whatsoever, so your entire RFD is based on Fallacies and thus Fallacious.
Posted by Sagey 7 years ago
That site on Mt Ararat was a result of a rock slide/fault. No wood was ever discovered there, not even fossilized wood as would be expected if it really was Ark related.
The Ark story was evidence of God's extreme Malevolence and Narcissism, not goodness.
Such arguments for it being a sign of Mercy are extremely Fallacious.
Killing thousands of innocents is not Mercy in any being's eyes, except dumber than dumb Christians.
Such is how Indoctrination reduces people's Intelligence.
Posted by dsjpk5 7 years ago
Or when referring to "the earth", maybe they mean "the part of the earth they live in."
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by neutral 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con wins. There are PLENTY of evidences of great floods in ancient times, and even modern times. The recent floods in Pakistan, for many a small villager forced to displace, did indeed cover the 'earth' as they knew it. The idea of flood in ancient times on flood planes without flood control, where people raised cattle and farmed, is not an outrageous idea in the slightest. Evidence of a wooden ship, whose wood would most likely have been taken apart AFTER the flood to make new structures, etc. would be rather difficult to find. Its also a story from a manuscript handed down over many generations before being written, and the lesson is not one of science, but ethics. Preparedness. Honesty. Integrity. Doing what is right, even when others are not (A lesson for the Financial Industry)? The parable of Noah remains a valuable lesson today. If we try to turn ethics in to science project? Well, we've missed the point.
Vote Placed by Sagey 7 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro asserted BOP convincingly, Con drew up only fallacious assertions and failed or disproven evidence, the Mt Ararat site is a rock formation, it never contained wood, caused by rock slide. Con forfeited last round giving Pro a better conduct vote.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.