Which Bible Do You Trust, and Why?

[FlyersFan]

According to the book "The 7 Daughters of Eve" by the genetecist Bryan Sykes, there is evidence that all human DNA can be traced back to 7 haplogroups in prehistory, and these all descended from a mitochondrial 'Eve' common female ancestor.

It could have been that the human race was reduced to one family's genetics in late prehistory (Noah had a wife and sons, who had wives - there is no record of any daughters in Genesis).

There was no genetic bottleneck 4000 years ago.
And our DNA is too diverse to have all come from one woman 4,000  years ago.
We have black, white, asian brown people ... and they couldn't all evolve that
way in 4,000 years.

DNA diversity proves the Noahs flood story is wrong.  So does the fact that we all dont speak the same language and have the same God and the same culture.  If we all came from one family rescued by God, then we'd all be the religion of Noah.   But we aren't.

There are unbroken civilizations on earth ... unbroken all through the supposed Noahs flood timeline.    Egyptian civilization was unbroken ... and thrived.   Same with China.   Same with India.   Same with the aborigines in Australia.   We have the evidence and the history of these cultures .. all diverse in DNA and all unbroken civilizations.

[FlyersFan]

But again, you are assuming that the flood occurred in 4,000 BC. We do know, from the geological record, that there was significant rapid climate change at the end of the Younger Dryas and that only a couple of thousand years later, the Black Sea flooded down from Nortern Europe into the Middle East about 5,500 BC.

That's a regional flood and it occurred 13,000 years ago whereas the Noahs flood was supposedly 4,000 years ago.  Not the same thing.   The Noahs flood says it was covering the whole earth over the mountaintops.  It says only 8 people survived.   It says all the worlds animals were saved 2 by 2.    This simply did not happen.   The story is not true.  It's an allegory.  I already gave the information showing where the story was stolen from ... the Sumerians pagan story of Gilgimesh ... and the Hebrews reworked it and recrafted it to fit their own religion and culture.

[3rdrockfrmsun]

There was no genetic bottleneck 4000 years ago.
And our DNA is too diverse to have all come from one woman 4,000  years ago.
We have black, white, asian brown people ... and they couldn't all evolve that
way in 4,000 years.

DNA diversity proves the Noahs flood story is wrong.  So does the fact that we all dont speak the same language and have the same God and the same culture.  If we all came from one family rescued by God, then we'd all be the religion of Noah.   But we aren't.

There are unbroken civilizations on earth ... unbroken all through the supposed Noahs flood timeline.    Egyptian civilization was unbroken ... and thrived.   Same with China.   Same with India.   Same with the aborigines in Australia.   We have the evidence and the history of these cultures .. all diverse in DNA and all unbroken civilizations.

This article actually makes the opposite point of what you’re saying. It shows that evolution and genetic changes can happen up to four times faster than we thought. That means populations can diversify in appearance and adaptation in a much shorter timespan than traditional models used to claim.
So if anything, that strengthens the case that humanity could have developed regional diversity within a few thousand years — not weakens it.
As for a “genetic bottleneck,” there’s plenty of evidence for regional catastrophes that dramatically reduced populations. The Mesopotamian floodplain, where the Noah story originates, did experience massive flooding events (be it 4,000 or 14,000 years ago, ie: younger dryas) that would’ve wiped out entire societies. To the survivors, that would’ve been “the whole world.”
And about “unbroken civilizations” — none of those cultures wrote their own creation stories in a vacuum. Flood myths from Egypt, Mesopotamia, India, and even Australia all point to something big enough to be remembered across the ancient world. Whether you call it allegory or history, that’s not a coincidence.

[FlyersFan]

This article actually makes the opposite point of what you’re saying. 

Actually no it doesn't.   No where does it say that 6 Middle Eastern people floating in a boat could give birth to black children and asian children.  It just says that evolution may have happened faster than the hundreds of thousands of years we think it does.

We know the Noahs Ark tale as told in the bible simply is not true.   It is not literal history.  It is allegory and it was taken from a pagan story of the Sumerians.

Anyone looking for Noahs Ark from the story of 2300 BC are wasting their time.   It didn't happen.

[3rdrockfrmsun]

Actually no it doesn't.   No where does it say that 6 Middle Eastern people floating in a boat could give birth to black children and asian children.  It just says that evolution may have happened faster than the hundreds of thousands of years we think it does.

We know the Noahs Ark tale as told in the bible simply is not true.   It is not literal history.  It is allegory and it was taken from a pagan story of the Sumerians.

Anyone looking for Noahs Ark from the story of 2300 BC are wasting their time.   It didn't happen.

You’re missing the point of the article — it’s not about “six Middle Eastern people turning into different races.” It’s about how fast genetic traits can adapt and diversify when populations spread out and isolate. Environmental pressures, diet, and migration patterns can change physical features faster than old evolutionary timelines used to assume. That’s exactly how regional differences can develop without needing hundreds of thousands of years.
And no one’s saying people should go looking for a wooden boat on a mountain. The story of Noah probably reflects a real ancient flood memory that was retold through a theological lens — just like the Epic of Gilgamesh reflects the same shared memory from a different culture. The flood narrative being older doesn’t make it “stolen.” It makes it preserved.
People in the ancient world weren’t trying to write geology textbooks — they were trying to explain why humanity keeps falling, rebuilding, and being shown mercy.
So sure, maybe the Ark story isn’t literal down to the cubit. But pretending the whole thing is a pagan copy-paste job is just lazy scholarship.

[andy06shake]

he story of Noah probably reflects a real ancient flood memory that was retold through a theological lens — just like the Epic of Gilgamesh reflects the same shared memory from a different culture. The flood narrative being older doesn’t make it “stolen.” It makes it preserved.

It also makes it inaccurate.

To them, a regional flood would have seemed to encompass the entire world, since their sense of the world was limited to what they could see and know.
 
After all, if I awoke to find water stretching from horizon to horizon, I might easily reach the same conclusion.

[3rdrockfrmsun]

It also makes it inaccurate.

To them, a regional flood would have seemed to encompass the entire world, since their sense of the world was limited to what they could see and know.
 
After all, if I awoke to find water stretching from horizon to horizon, I might easily reach the same conclusion.

It would’ve absolutely felt like the entire world to them. I think that’s what makes those stories so powerful. They weren’t exaggerating for drama’s sake; they were describing the end of everything they knew.
And that’s why I don’t think it’s fair to call it “inaccurate.” It’s accurate to their world. Just like we use “the whole world” to mean “everywhere we can see,” they did too — only difference is their horizon ended at the edge of the floodwaters.

[FlyersFan]

It also makes it inaccurate.

Exactly.
And it means that the Noah Story is NOT the literal inerrant Word of God.
It's a rip off of a pagan Sumerian story.
So anyone saying that the Ron Wyatt hoaxer found Noahs Ark in Turkey ... it's impossible.
So anyone saying that the world was wiped out 4200 years ago ... didn't happen.
So anyone saying that God Himself saved Noah and his family ... prepare to have your faith shaken.
Most of Christianity believes Noahs story is an allegory.
And as you said ... IT IS INACCURATE ... NOT the literal inerrant Word of God.

[FlyersFan]

And that’s why I don’t think it’s fair to call it “inaccurate.” It’s accurate to their world. 

Either something is accurate or it's not.
The Noahs Ark story is inaccurate.
Doesn't matter if people think it's real .... it's not ... and thinking it's real doesn't change reality.
God Himself didn't come down from Heaven and save 8 people in a world wide flood 4200 years ago.
It simply did not happen.

[andy06shake]

It would’ve absolutely felt like the entire world to them. I think that’s what makes those stories so powerful. They weren’t exaggerating for drama’s sake; they were describing the end of everything they knew.
And that’s why I don’t think it’s fair to call it “inaccurate.” It’s accurate to their world. Just like we use “the whole world” to mean “everywhere we can see,” they did too — only difference is their horizon ended at the edge of the floodwaters.

Inaccurate by our perception, by theirs not so much.

Perception doesn't alter facts.
 
It does, however, shape how those facts are understood.