1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a friendly forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting after you have posted 20 posts and have received 5 likes.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

  2. Please check out our two newest forums, the "Buy, Sell or Trade" (link ) forum in the Society Category, and the "Conspiracy Theories" (link) forum in our Discussion and Debate Category.

Noah's Flood was 23 ft (Gen 7:20)

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by mklhawley, Jan 24, 2011.

  1. mklhawley

    mklhawley Searching for Truth with a Broken Flashlight

    Messages:
    17
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Christian
    Greetings all,

    Most people do not realize it, but the Bible mentions how deep Noah’s floodwaters were. Genesis 7:20 states:

    -“Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail;” (KJV)

    Since one cubit is roughly equivalent to eighteen inches, fifteen cubits is equivalent to approximately 23 feet. The simplest and most literal interpretation of this verse states that Noah’s floodwaters rose up only to 23 feet. A flood of this magnitude could not completely inundate the entire planet, but it would do major damage to communities living at the mouth of the Tigris and Euphrates Rivers in Mesopotamia. Their “world” would have been devastated.

    Young earth creationists claim that properly applied human logic points to a global flood, because of the mention of mountains and the use of global language. Note how Genesis 7:19-20 is written,

    -“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills[Hebrew: heharim], that were under the whole heaven, were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains[heharim] were covered.” (KJV)

    -“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains[heharim] that were under the whole heaven were covered. Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the mountains[heharim] were covered.” (American Standard Version of 1901)

    The founders of modern creation science and modern flood geology, Henry Morris and John Whitcomb, in their book The Genesis Flood state:

    “The phrase “fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail” does not mean that the Flood was only fifteen cubits (23 feet) deep, for the phrase is qualified by the one which immediately follows: “and the mountains were covered.” Nor does it necessarily mean that the mountains were covered to a depth of only fifteen cubits, for this would require that all antediluvian mountains be exactly the same altitude…. Nearly all commentators agree that the phrase “fifteen cubits” in 7:20 must therefore refer to the draught of the Ark. In other words, the Ark sank into the water to a depth of fifteen cubits (just one-half of its total height) when fully laden.”

    The reason why Morris and Whitcomb did not accept the simplest literal interpretation of the clause “fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail” is because of the word “mountains” in Genesis 7:19 & 20, however, the original Hebrew text does not say “mountains”, it says can be translated as mountains, but it can also be translated as mounds, range of hills, or the hill country. For example, Psalm 121:1 translates heharim as hills: Esa eynay el heharim mey’ayin yavo ezri (I lift my eyes up to the hills). If we replace it with hills in Genesis 7:20 the second clause conforms to the simplest, most literal interpretation of the first clause:

    -“Fifteen cubits upward did the waters prevail; and the hills were covered.”

    Interpreting as hills would mean that the King James and the American Standard translators made a common mistake. Is there any evidence that supports this mistake in the translation of Genesis 7:19-20? Yes, compare Genesis 7:19 in the King James Version with it in the American Standard Version (used by Morris and Whitcomb).

    -“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills[heharim], that were under the whole heaven, were covered.” (KJV)

    -“And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high mountains[heharim] that were under the whole heaven were covered.” (American Standard Version).

    Either the King James translators or the American Standard translators got it wrong. It may seem like a simple mistranslation, but it means the difference between a global flood and a local Mesopotamian flood.
    A comparison of the words “prevailed” and “covered” used in Genesis 7:19 with them used in Genesis 7:20 demonstrates that Morris and Whitcomb’s “draught” logic is flawed. Notice how Genesis 7:20 is merely a rephrasing of Genesis 7:19. This rephrasing is very obvious in the Hebrew Text and also in the American Standard Version, but since the King James Version has mixed the heharim translations it seems less obvious. “Exceedingly” is the equivalent modifier for “prevailed” in Genesis 7:19 as “15 cubits upward” is in Genesis 7:20. The “draught” logic was used with Genesis 7:20, but it holds no water when applied to Genesis 7:19. “15 cubits upward” clearly refers to the waters upon the earth and not the waters measured upon the Ark. This leaves only one possible conclusion. Heharim properly translates to hills, not mountains.

    Sincerely,

    Mike
     
    Last edited: Jan 24, 2011
    Targ likes this.
  2. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Hey, Mike -- let me set my KJVO aside and agree with you for just this post, so I can make a major point that you're overlooking:

    Genesis 6:13 ¶ And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.

    This means that the water could have been 1/2 of 1/4 of 1/8 of 1/16 of 1/32 of 1 inch in depth, and they all would have drowned in it [somehow].

    When God ordains it, nature doesn't stand around debating it with Him -- nature either complies or takes a hike.

    Only scientists want to balk.
     
  3. juvenissun

    juvenissun Veteran

    Messages:
    18,101
    Likes Received:
    15
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Good analysis. Thank you.

    However, since the flood is a global one, the problem of water budget still exists even it is only 5 feet above the sea level.

    If you want to argue for a local flood, then your analysis may not be needed, even it make sense.
     
  4. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe New Member

    Messages:
    37,157
    Likes Received:
    616
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Agnostic
    The problem is, had God ordained it, he would have succeeded -- since we already know something besides Noah and his family survived the flood (think: Goliath was a. . .) then God failed -- again.
     
  5. wensdee

    wensdee New Member

    Messages:
    354
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Seeker
    For anyone to believe there was a world wide flood all reason must be set aside.
     
  6. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    You mean 'evidence', don't you? or are you admitting that scientists 'reasoned' themselves into rejecting the WWF?
     
  7. Psudopod

    Psudopod Godspeed, Spacebat

    Messages:
    3,036
    Likes Received:
    1
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Faith:
    Other-Religion


    Christian geologists realised there was no evidence for the global flood, yes.
     
  8. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Lack of evidence is not evidence for a lack thereof -- (or however that quip goes).
     
  9. Psudopod

    Psudopod Godspeed, Spacebat

    Messages:
    3,036
    Likes Received:
    1
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Faith:
    Other-Religion


    True, but something like a world wide global flood should leave something behind. And it's more than just a lack of evidence. It's all the things that would be impossible if a flood had happened.
     
  10. Wiccan_Child

    Wiccan_Child Contributor

    Messages:
    19,631
    Likes Received:
    8
    Marital Status:
    In Relationship
    Politics:
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    Faith:
    Atheist
    Sure it is. The absence of evidence for elephants in my garden is pretty strong evidence that there is an absence of elephants in my garden.
     
  11. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist

    Not necessarily.

    I personally believe God cleaned up the mess; and even stockpiled some of it here and there.

    Thus the White Cliffs of Dover.
    Show me one thing -- (just one please) -- that:

    1. Renders the Flood impossible.
    2. God couldn't handle.
    Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego in a burning, fiery furnace is also scientifically impossible -- yet it happened.
     
  12. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Fair enough.
     
  13. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe New Member

    Messages:
    37,157
    Likes Received:
    616
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Agnostic
    World Wrestling Federation?

    [​IMG]

    Um, AV, I'd hate to break it to you, but...
     
  14. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe New Member

    Messages:
    37,157
    Likes Received:
    616
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Agnostic


    Is there any reason, besides desperate necessity, to believe this?

    After all, if God cleaned up the mess, there'd be nothing left -- every flood geologist who ever claimed to have found evidence would be dead wrong (or they'd be smarter than God.)


    Actually, AV -- it didn't. Just a myth. Sorry to tell you.
     
  15. dawiyd

    dawiyd Veteran

    Messages:
    1,761
    Likes Received:
    42
    Politics:
    UK-Liberal-Democrats
    Faith:
    Judaism
    What about them, they are made from algae and marine life.
     
  16. AV1611VET

    AV1611VET SCIENCE CAN TAKE A HIKE Supporter

    Messages:
    3,354,047
    Likes Received:
    8,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Baptist
    Just like Adam and Eve, right?
     
  17. Nathan Poe

    Nathan Poe New Member

    Messages:
    37,157
    Likes Received:
    616
    Politics:
    US-Democrat
    Faith:
    Agnostic
    Who?

    Sheesh, AV -- you're not even trying anymore. It's sad.
     
  18. Hespera

    Hespera Junior Member

    Messages:
    7,229
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Private
    Faith:
    Buddhist
    next, analyze how many angels can dance on the head of a pin.
     
  19. mzungu

    mzungu INVICTUS

    Messages:
    7,122
    Likes Received:
    3
    Gender:
    Male
    Marital Status:
    Married
    Faith:
    Atheist
  20. sandwiches

    sandwiches Mas sabe el diablo por viejo que por diablo.

    Messages:
    6,092
    Likes Received:
    0
    Marital Status:
    Single
    Faith:
    Atheist
    That's AV's whole point. God hid or got rid of all the evidence of the flood... except for that evidence which he didn't hide or got rid of.

    So, to clarify, if scientists find evidence of a global flood, then that proves his claim and if they don't find evidence of a global flood, then that proves his claim. Simple. ^_^
     
Loading...