Progressive Hebrew Faith

Part of the Biblical Noahides Movement

Contact us:        valandriel@hotmail.com         

About PHF

Progressive Hebrew Faith is a liberal spiritual monotheistic movement.  It was founded by Daniel Daly of Canberra, Australia.  It centres around a Hebrew understanding of religion, particularly focused on the One True God and the Holy book the Hebrew Torah.  In essence, we are similar in nature to the Jewish Sect the Samaritans, as we make use of the same text – the Hebrew Torah (Pentateuch).  However, unlike them, we approach the faith of the Torah from a modern-day, enlightened perspective.  The ancient Jewish sect, the Sadducees, also relied on the written Torah alone, rejecting the Phariseeical Mishnah, which has come to be known as the Oral Law.  However, they were adamant that the whole Torah was written by Moses, a position which we reject.  In some ways we are also similar to the Reform/Liberal/Progressive movements of Judaism, however, they still see validity in some way or another in the remainder of the Hebrew Tenakh and the Oral law – documents which we completely reject.

Core Teaching of the Movement

·       Belief in Almighty God as the creator of the Universe

·       Belief in creation as opposed to evolution as the best explanation to mankind’s origins

·       A Progressive understanding of the Hebrew Torah and practice of the Faith

·       Acknowledgement of the Documentary Hypothesis as the best explanation of Torah authorship

·       A rejection of the Neviim and Kethuvim of the Hebrew Tenakh as non-canonical, as well as a rejection of the Oral Law (Mishnah) and its commentary (the Talmud).

·       A Universal application of the 10 Commandments – we see this as the CORE LAW to the Torah, applying it to all members of our movement, be they Israelite or Gentile.

More Information

If you would like more information about this movement, please contact  Daniel Daly at email:  valandriel@hotmail.com or telephone (Australia) +61 2 6291 4414

ARTICLES

Is all Mankind Really Descended from Noah? (A Speculative Viewpoint)

Today we will be looking at the legend of Noah and the ark.  This is a worthwhile study, as Noah, so the Hebrew bible says, is the forefather of humanity today.  If this were true, then the covenant of Noah that the Hebrew bible speaks of would apply to all mankind today.

For those of you who are new to the story of Noah, here is a brief snapshot of the biblical portrait.

Mankind had gone astray from the laws that God had committed to them.  So bad had they become that God decided to destroy all flesh via a flood.  Only Noah was found righteous before him.  Because he was found righteous, God instructed Noah to build an ark that would house himself and his family.  When the flood came, the world was destroyed – all humanity with it – all except for Noah and his family.  All of this can be found in Genesis chapters 6 to 10.  Now, after the flood, God entered into a covenant with Noah and all his descendants, which would include humanity today – with, naturally, separate covenants for the children of Abraham and Israel.

Well, this is an interesting story, but the question remains what of it, if any, is true.

For most people in the world, the story of Noah is only a legend.  They are, to a degree, familiar with it, but see it nothing more than a Jewish/Christian fable.  But the world’s opinion is not necessarily the truth, is it.

I used to believe that the story of Noah was literally true in every aspect, and that I was in fact descended from this ancient patriarch myself.  However, truth is an elusive thing, and just because I believed at a certain stage in my spiritual development certain things about the bible, they were not necessarily the truth.  I found out things about the bible, certain problems with it, that made me question biblical faith seriously.  The end result of this type of thinking was that I ultimately concluded that the Bible was NOT the word of God as fundamentalists claim, but rather a historical record – a fallible historical record – of God’s dealing with mankind.

So I gradually revised my thinking about the Noahide concept.

Now, what are the facts, if any, about the story of Noah?  Do we have any evidence to support the conclusion that there was a man called Noah, and that a worldwide flood occurred.  In fact, we do.  Creation science, although fundamentalist in nature in general, does provide sound evidence that a worldwide flood occurred.  Such things as the fossil record, fossils being found near the top of Mount Everest and other evidences suggest strongly that a worldwide flood occurred.  The best theory that I have heard about in relation to a flood is what is called the ‘Hydroplates’ theory.  A good video is available from the creation science foundation in Queensland, Australia, called the ‘Young Age of the Earth’ which briefly addresses the hydroplates theory.  In brief the theory is this.  Plates of water existed about 10 miles under the surface of the earth before the flood.  When God decided to bring the flood, these cavities burst open along the pacific and Atlantic oceans along what is now the oceanic underwater ridges.  These ridges run right along the ocean floor, encompassing the earth.  They can be found there today.  When the ridges burst open, water spurt up at an incredible rate, going into the atmosphere.  This is were all the rain of the flood came from.  The water came at such an incredible rate that oil and coal reservoirs were eventually formed.  Before the flood, the world was likely one ‘Super Continent’, with various seas at different places.  As a result of the ridge splitting in the earth, earth from under the ridge rose up to fill the gap, leading to the creation of the various mountain ranges around the world.  So when the earth rose up in various places, the water diminished from the earth into the lowlands, and the continents we know of today were formed.  That is a brief explanation of the theory, but if you want more information, search the internet under ‘hydroplates theory’ or order the above video.  I can provide you with contact details for the creation science foundation – just email me at  valandriel@hotmail.com

The theory does explain such things as the fossil record, how coal and oil reservoirs could be formed quickly, and the various geological phenomenon that point to a worldwide flood.

And the hydroplates theory is in accordance with how the bible describes ‘the foundations of the deep bursting open’.

Of course, this is just a brief snapshot into the creation science evidence for a flood.  If you want to know more, try contacting the ‘answers in genesis’ website, or type in ‘creation science flood’ into a search engine.  You will be presented with a whole host of evidence which supports the notion that a worldwide flood did indeed occur.

So the biblical story of a worldwide flood is accurate.  This does lend weight to the biblical claim that the bible comes from God, but it is only one piece of evidence.  It is not the whole story, as we shall see.

Noah himself.  Did he exist?  We have no historical records, apart from the bible, that prove that a man called Noah lived and built the ark.  There are of course the ancient legends found in many cultures that speak of a worldwide flood, and even some tales of a man and his family surviving this flood.  The Babylonian epic is one such piece of evidence.

So the Noah theory is possible.  But the bottom line is this.  The only evidence we really have is the bible itself.  As many of us know, the bible is not an infallible document, so we cannot have absolute proof that the Story of Noah is 100% true – or even partially true.  The plain fact comes down to this.  To believe that a man called Noah exists requires ‘Faith’.  We can not prove he existed with historical records.  We can only reach our conclusions based upon these records.  To claim that Noah existed is a fact, as some creationists do, is unable to be proven absolutely.  All they really have is the Bible, and the manmade tradition that the bible is the infallible word of God.  This is not scientific truth.  It is theory and faith.  That is all that it is.

However, as a flood did indeed occur, and the bible speaks of this, let us consider the notion that Noah did exist.

The noahide concept explains how man survived the flood and later populated the planet.  This is the chief idea of the Noah story.  Supposedly, Noah built the ark for himself, his family, and all those animals, thus preserving seed upon the planet.  Are there any problems with this theory?  Yes, there are.

A chief problem is the idea that all the kinds of animals could have fitted on the ark.  Science has shown that every kind of species on earth today could not have fitted upon the ark.  Doubt of this theory is why so many people do not believe the Noah story literally.  The standard explanation that I have heard from creation scientists regarding this is that only the ‘Genus’ of every animal was brought upon the ark.  Genus refers to a grouping of animals above the ‘species’ level.  The theory is that each of these ‘genuses’ housed the genetic information for all the various animal species, that subsequently repopulated the earth unto today.  Is this possible.

Technically it is possible for one type of animal to beget a ‘brother’ of another species, but this is not a common event.  Let us look at an example.  The dog.  If the theory is true that there was only a pair or seven dogs on the ark (depending on whether they are clean or unclean animals – I am not sure in regards to a dog as the bible is silent) then these dogs must have ultimately spawned the entire diversity of dog species on the planet today.  Is this plausible?  Not really.  Whilst technically possible to beget a dog of a different species if that species is in the genes of the parent, the ongoing procreation of the new species is doubtful.  Such rarities of a different species would likely be swallowed up in succeeding generations by the main group.  The ‘kind’ of dogs brought upon the ark would likely remain the dogs that would breed through subsequent generations.  Oddities, such as a different species coming along, would, as we have said, likely be swallowed up in subsequent generations.  Thus we can see that the survival of all the different species of dogs is highly doubtful. 

And of course the fundamental problem of the ‘Kind’ of dogs being brought upon the ark containing ‘ALL’ the genetic information of every dog species created by God remains.  As God created different species of dogs at the beginning, and not genuses, the dogs brought upon the ark would have had to contain all the genetic information of every species created by God.  Given the fact that there is such an enormous array of species of dogs on the planet today, for the dogs on the ark to have contained all the genetic information of all the species created, there must have been a ‘ENORMOUS’ amount of interbreeding amongst dog species before the flood.  This, of course, is highly improbable.

So we can see that the notion that animals of every kind being brought upon the ark appears to be an invention of the Hebrew chronicler of the Noah story.

Are there any other problems associated with the story of Noah and his family alone surviving the flood.  In fact, there are.

Like the diversity of dog species, the ethnic diversity of mankind today suggests strongly that we are not all descended from just one man and his family.  For example, take 19^th century Africa and Europe.  Africa – nearly 100% black/dark skinned.  Europe – nearly 100% white/fair skinned.  If it is possible for men to beget offspring of different ethnic characteristics – in this case, differing melanin (skin pigment) contents - then why are these continents predominantly one ethnic type only.  If the theory of Noah is correct, then Africa and Europe should be home to a diverse array of ethnic varieties – be they black, white, red or yellow.  The truth is that black people ‘TEND’ to beget black people, and white people tend to beget white people.  That is the way of the world.  Thus, if we look at the example of Noah, then Noah’s family should have tended to beget the same ethnic type of people, whatever ethnic type that was.  Differences in ethnicity amongst later generations should have been ‘Swallowed up’ in the main ethnic type in only a few generations.  For example, if Noah and his family were white and, within a few generations, one of Noah’s descendants happened to beget a black child, then the odds of this black child forming its own ethnic group  in future generations is highly improbable.  Given the fact that the black child would have mated with a white child (creating a mulatto), then later offspring would gradually come back to the dominant white ethnic characteristics of the major group.  Of course, the reality in the world of today is that we have ethnic groupings according to the place they are on the planet.  If the story of Noah were true, we (all humanity) should be predominantly ONE ethnic type.

So the idea that only Noah and his family survived the flood is probably not the truth.  Highly improbable in fact.

Well, if a flood did indeed occur, and we have such a diverse array of ethnic types on the planet today, were did they come from.  How did they survive the flood?

I propose the following ‘realistic’ explanation to the story of mankinds diversity on the planet today. 

In the beginning God did indeed create many types of ethnic peoples on the planet.  Not just one couple, Adam and Eve, but a whole host of families, ranging in ethnic diversity.  Even Genesis 1:26 suggests the possibility of this event.  These families were created all over the planet – not just in Eden – but placed in there homelands in different parts of the earth.

When the flood came, God indeed may have called a man named Noah and had an ark built and survived the flood.  But he was not the only one who survived the flood.  The high probability is that when the various peoples of the earth saw the rains coming and persisting, when it came to the land being drowned in water, they boarded boats and rafts of various kinds.  At this stage in man’s development it is highly probably that they had indeed invented sea vessels of various kinds.  They would have likely had food taken with them, so that when the flood came to an end, they resettled the earth.  And as for the various animals that survived the flood, these could have been kept alive on the debris that would have naturally been floating on the surface of the waters.

Thus, to say that ‘Only Noah’ and his family survived the flood is highly improbable, as it is

Nearly certain that many families of peoples survived the flood in some way, and eventually went on to repopulate the earth after the flood had ended.

Of course, the biblical creationist will say ‘NO’ to this theory, but his only evidence is that the bible says only Noah survived the flood and, as many of us know, the bible is a fallible, manmade document.

When the evidence suggests that many people survived the worldwide flood we should listen to that evidence, instead of dogmatically stating the bible is absolute truth when, of course, the belief in an infallible bible is only a matter of ‘Faith’.  It is not proven, scientific truth.

One final point, a problem with the Noah only story is that it does not explain how certain species of animals can be found in one place on the planet alone.  For example, you only find Kangaroos in Australia.  If Kangaroos were on the ark, and the ark came to rest in the region of modern day Turkey, why is it that Kangaroos today are only found in the (Separated by water) continent of Australia.  Kangaroos are quite capable of surviving in different parts of the Earth, yet they are only found in modern day Australia.  The obvious explanation is that before the flood God created Kangaroos in the region of Australia and that, after surviving the flood on the debris upon the water, the resettled and repopulated the region of Australia alone.  To my way of thinking this is the only plausible explanation.

To summarise what we have learned today, the story of Noah alone surviving the flood is clearly only a legend – and, most probably, a false legend at that.  The likelihood is that many peoples and animals survived the flood in various places throughout the earth.  After the flood the repopulated the earth, leading to our present day scenario.

So, should we believe the story of Noah?  Probably not.  It is likely the invention of a Hebrew chronicler, someone who had received the tradition of a worldwide flood, and invented the story of Noah and the Ark to explain how mankind survived the flood.  It is highly doubtful that the story of Noah is historical truth in every aspect.  While it is quite possible that a man called Noah existed, and is the forefather of the Israelite people in particular, it is doubtful that he is the forefather of all modern day mankind.

Dangers of Being High on Drugs
Obviously Marijuana doesn't kill you. But it can distort your mental health, and when you are high you are less in you capacities to negotiate challenging things in life. It's a no brainer - working on the job, carrying out official duties, driving - these sorts of things can very much adversely affect other people in life, and can lead to self-harm indirectly. A Noahide is reminded that God destroyed the people of the flood because they inflicted harm on society - being high can more readily, even if not the intent, lead to harm being caused on members of society. In this sense there is a moral basis in princples of the Rainbow Torah for sensible legislation pertaining to drug use. In personal use situations, really, within your own domicile old property holdings is about all that is really appropriate for using drugs. On your own private turf such things can be afforded to various degrees. But remember, you often have family and friends in such dwellings with you at times, and they have rights to be protected from harm. It's an argument from principles of the Rainbow Torah that we can not form violence against people. Harm which happens to people indirectly and even directly from drug usage is certainly something which needs to be taken into consideration, and legislation pertaining to it is not immoral. Yes, its nobodys business what you ingest in life - but it is society's business how you affect THEM.