was noah under the law of moses? huh?

by sowhatnow 16 Replies latest watchtower bible

  • sowhatnow

    im confused, a poster for the whole mamoth elephants and ark deal going on, with a gizillion pages,

    quoted genesis ch 7 about him bringing 7 clean animals

    and only two unclean, well i thought it wasnt till moses came along that all these requirements were done, so noah was under the law too?

    but did not noah after the flood had the right to eat all flesh?

    what were clean animals and unclean animals before the flood and why? I did not think there were israelties before moses. noah shouldnt have been under any law, he was alive when the nephelem were messing around with the women.

    what now?

    huh huh huh?

  • fulltimestudent

    You've fingered one of the problems in Genesis. That book is clearly a redacted work, the author(s) possibly attempting to synthesise one account out of various written or oral accounts.

    In Ch. 7 the author(s) imagine Yahweh, who categorises animals as being either clean or unclean, instructing Noah to take seven clean and only two unclean. The author(s) cannot visualise a world where all animals are the same, and has to see them as being in one of the two categories.

    That should make it clear to the reader that the document we know as Genesis was composed long after the Law of Moses.

  • Apognophos

    The theory among scholars is that there were two accounts, and a later redactor had the unenviable job of combining them into one story (it was probably forbidden to omit a word from either one). This theory explains a number of things, including differences in terminology, and redundant statements. This page has an attempt at separating the two stories, and mentions various contradictions such as the number of animals that Noah took: http://contradictionsinthebible.com/the-flood-narratives/. The Priestly writer only has two of each animal being taken in, but the older Yahwist writer accidentally retrojected the clean/unclean division into the story and has seven of the clean animals going in, so there's some spare ones to sacrifice after the Flood.

  • blondie

    Well, starting shortly after Adam and Eve sinned per the bible, Abel sacrificed sheep....so animal sacrifice of certain types of animals had been happening for 2,000 years (bible chronology). Not a stretch to think they needed to take more than 2 of each animal.

    The WTS waffles back and forth on the importance of the principles of the law code prior to Moses.

    Joseph is praised because he knew adultery was wrong without the law code

    but then

    Judah is excused for having sex with a temple prostitute because THERE was no law code

    (remember Joseph and Judah were half-brothers)

  • prologos

    no, but moses is supposed to have written both the law and 1. moses (genesis) . so he could have written in such a way to make it clear for his readers, but still begs the question:

    How did NOAH know what the supposed god meant by these terms? clean& unclean ?

    Lucky for NOAH that he had an ADVANCED COPY of the law?: the Elephants split the hoof, but do not shew the cud.They are unclean. 7 elephants? plus food? Appropriately though, their droppings are food for other creatures, because these parchiderms do not chew the cud, it goes more or less straight through instead of through 4 stomachs.

    bon appetit!

  • sowhatnow

    funny old book the bible is...

  • berrygerry

    Why did God make (and then preserve) unclean animals?

  • Crazyguy

    Its funny someone posted on the other thread when I posted about there being three species of elaphant and they posted that noah was only to take two of each kind. So If only African elaphants were taken then how do we get the other two species ?? This story is to stupid, and your piont is just another nail in the coffin.

  • Apognophos

    That was me. The Society's answer to your question on where the species came from is in the article "Ark" in the Insight volumes:

    *** it-1 pp. 164-165 Ark ***
    The “kinds” of animals selected had reference to the clear-cut and unalterable boundaries or limits set by the Creator, within which boundaries creatures are capable of breeding “according to their kinds.” It has been estimated by some that the hundreds of thousands of species of animals today could be reduced to a comparatively few family “kinds”—the horse kind and the cow kind, to mention but two. The breeding boundaries according to “kind” established by Jehovah were not and could not be crossed. With this in mind some investigators have said that, had there been as few as 43 “kinds” of mammals, 74 “kinds” of birds, and 10 “kinds” of reptiles in the ark, they could have produced the variety of species known today. Others have been more liberal in estimating that 72 “kinds” of quadrupeds and less than 200 bird “kinds” were all that were required. That the great variety of animal life known today could have come from inbreeding within so few “kinds” following the Flood is proved by the endless variety of humankind—short, tall, fat, thin, with countless variations in the color of hair, eyes, and skin—all of whom sprang from the one family of Noah.

    So, in short, the species came from what creationists call "microevolution", the natural variation of life within certain prescribed boundaries. Like blondie, I am reporting, not supporting.

  • Crazyguy

    Well thats what the IT book said and we know how much knowledge they have on any subject and thats not much!!!!!

Share this