Was Noah's flood global?

[tonychanyt]

To all you doubters I have one question.

Has God Said?

Why would God give a rainbow to mark His Promise the
whole world would not be flooded again it it was only a local flood?

The earth was not divided till the time of Peleg.


Hath God Said?

Let proposition P1 = Noah's flood was global.

True?

 

[WilliamLhk]

Let proposition P1 = Noah's flood was global.

True?

Absolutely true.

P2: All the nations of the world descend from Shem, Japheth, and Ham. And how they began to spread out from the Middle East into all the earth is told in Genesis, and in more detail in Josephus and especially the Book of Jasher.

The word goyim/nations, btw, is never used of the era prior to the Flood.

 

[tonychanyt]

Absolutely true.

See If you think that Noah's flood was global and wish to wager on it,

 

[WilliamLhk]

See If you think that Noah's flood was global and wish to wager on it,

I don't see this as being a Christian response. Nor informative, in any way.

 

[tonychanyt]

I don't see this as being a Christian response. Nor informative, in any way.

Instead of overgeneralizing and jumping to conclusions, can you be more specific? To prove that you are not, go ahead and quote my words and contradict them if you are able.

 

[WilliamLhk]

Instead of overgeneralizing and jumping to conclusions, can you be more specific? To prove that you are not, go ahead and quote my words and contradict them if you are able.

Anyone who responds to a post by saying one is "overgeneralizing and jumping to conclusions" has the spirit of an accuser.

Bye, Tony. Waste of my time here.

 

[tonychanyt]

Anyone who responds to a post by saying one is "overgeneralizing and jumping to conclusions" has the spirit of an accuser.

Who has the spirit of an accuser? Did you not make the following accusation without proof:

I don't see this as being a Christian response. Nor informative, in any way.

Did you not overgeneralize by writing "I don't see this as being a Christian response. Nor informative, in any way."?

So, instead of overgeneralizing and jumping to conclusions, can you be more specific? To prove that you are not jumping to conclusions, go ahead and quote my words and contradict them if you are able. Try not to condemn yourself in the process as you did in your last reply.

 

[jamiec]

Genesis 6:

20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.​

Was Noah's flood global?

No, according to Barnes:

For the sake of Noah, the animal species also shall be preserved, "two of each, male and female." They are to come in pairs for propagation. The fowl, the cattle, the creeping thing or smaller animals, are to come. From this it appears that the wild animals are not included among the inmates of the ark. ... As the deluge was universal only in respect to the human race, it was not necessary to include any animals but those that were near man, and within the range of the overwhelming waters. Fodder and other provisions for a year have to be laid in.​

Did Noah have marsupial kangaroos in the ark?

No, according to Barnes, it was not a worldwide flood but it looked like one to Noah. As far as Noah could tell, his world died. For all intents and purposes of the redemption story, it was a catastrophic/global event: all humans died except Noah's family. That's the point.

National Center for Science Education gives more detailed calculations:

Because of the curvature of the earth, the horizon drops from where the viewer is standing. However, the drop is proportional to the square of the distance between the viewer and an object on the horizon (Young nd). From these relationships, it can be seen that a tribal chief (or Noah) standing on the deck of a large boat (Ark), perhaps 7.8 meters above the water, would not be able to see the tops of any hills as high as 15 m from as little as 24 km away across flood plains covered with water because the curvature of the earth prevents it (See the Appendix for examples of calculations). Most hills in this region that are as much as 15 m high are more than 95 km away from the river levees. Therefore, the survivors of the Flood could see only water in all directions while they were floating down the Tigris River and over the flood plains. Many of these hills would also be partly covered with water which would make their tops project less above the water level, and therefore, the curvature of the earth would make them disappear from the line of sight in even a shorter distance than 24 km.​

There is also a parallel Babylonian Story of the Flood written in about 1750 BC. Both stories called for a worldwide flood to destroy mankind. Even though the flood wasn't global, all humans in the world were killed except Noah's family.

This is basically a cross-posting of something posted elsewhere:

In the text of the Flood-story, there is nothing to indicate that the Flood was - from a more modern POV - global. The Greeks, Assyrians, Babylonians & Egyptians had no true notion of the extent or form or population of the world; so it is not clear why the Biblical texts should, uniquely, be free of similarly limited conceptions. From the POV of the author(s) of the text, and of the traditions that contributed to forming the text, the Flood was no doubt universal. It does not follow, that generations blessed with a more adequate knowledge of geography must also regard the Flood as universal. There is no obligation for modern Canadians, Japanese, Maori, Scots and Zulus to have the same geographical notions as the ancient Jews, merely because the ancient Jews knew and suspected nothing of those nations.

There is, indeed, nothing in the Genesis Flood-story to suggest that the narrative is any different, in point of historicity or the lack of it, from the myths and legends of Israel's neighbours. And there are several indications in the text that the Flood is not to be regarded as historical.

 

[WilliamLhk]

There is no obligation for modern Canadians, Japanese, Maori, Scots and Zulus to have the same geographical notions as the ancient Jews, merely because the ancient Jews knew and suspected nothing of those nations.

Neither the Jews nor any other nation existed at the time of the flood! And you have no evidence at all to know what people knew over 4000 years ago about the earth. Pure projection on your part.

 

[The Barbarian]

And you have no evidence at all to know what people knew over 4000 years ago about the earth.

Other than what they wrote about it...

The Epic of Gilgamesh about 2100 BCE, includes a description of the world and of his ancestor Utnapishtem, who has a story quite like that of Noah.

Flat. With a dome overhead. Hence the Hebrew conception of the Earth as a flat surface, with a solid dome over it, with windows from which water would fall as rain.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

Genesis 6:

20 Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive.​

Was Noah's flood global?

No, according to Barnes:

For the sake of Noah, the animal species also shall be preserved, "two of each, male and female." They are to come in pairs for propagation. The fowl, the cattle, the creeping thing or smaller animals, are to come. From this it appears that the wild animals are not included among the inmates of the ark. ... As the deluge was universal only in respect to the human race, it was not necessary to include any animals but those that were near man, and within the range of the overwhelming waters. Fodder and other provisions for a year have to be laid in.​

Did Noah have marsupial kangaroos in the ark?

No, according to Barnes, it was not a worldwide flood but it looked like one to Noah. As far as Noah could tell, his world died. For all intents and purposes of the redemption story, it was a catastrophic/global event: all humans died except Noah's family. That's the point.

National Center for Science Education gives more detailed calculations:

Because of the curvature of the earth, the horizon drops from where the viewer is standing. However, the drop is proportional to the square of the distance between the viewer and an object on the horizon (Young nd). From these relationships, it can be seen that a tribal chief (or Noah) standing on the deck of a large boat (Ark), perhaps 7.8 meters above the water, would not be able to see the tops of any hills as high as 15 m from as little as 24 km away across flood plains covered with water because the curvature of the earth prevents it (See the Appendix for examples of calculations). Most hills in this region that are as much as 15 m high are more than 95 km away from the river levees. Therefore, the survivors of the Flood could see only water in all directions while they were floating down the Tigris River and over the flood plains. Many of these hills would also be partly covered with water which would make their tops project less above the water level, and therefore, the curvature of the earth would make them disappear from the line of sight in even a shorter distance than 24 km.​

There is also a parallel Babylonian Story of the Flood written in about 1750 BC. Both stories called for a worldwide flood to destroy mankind. Even though the flood wasn't global, all humans in the world were killed except Noah's family.

Yes it was global, all earth landmass was covered, before anyone says there is not enough water on earth to do this know that the earth's crust contains a huge amounts of water...

Gen 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.

 

[tonychanyt]

Yes it was global

See If you think that Noah's flood was global and wish to wager on it and follow up there.

 

[The Barbarian]

Yes it was global, all earth landmass was covered, before anyone says there is not enough water on earth to do this know that the earth's crust contains a huge amounts of water...

Since the Bible does not say it was global, such a new doctrine would be man's addition to God's word.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

Since the Bible does not say it was global, such a new doctrine would be man's addition to God's word.

The word Global was not in use then but if you have eyes and can read it says; the Following;
Gen 7:19 And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that wereunder the whole heaven, were covered.

Do you understand yet?

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

I wrote it was global thus global = p1

 

[The Barbarian]

The word Global was not in use then but if you have eyes and can read it

The word "world" was in use then. And God does not use it to describe the flood. He says "land" not "world." Why not just take His word for it?

And the waters prevailed exceedingly upon the earth; and all the high hills, that wereunder the whole heaven, were covered.

Which is another reason we know it wasn't global. The Earth is not a flat surface under a dome with windows in it for water to pour through.

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

The word "world" was in use then. And God does not use it to describe the flood. He says "land" not "world." Why not just take His word for it?

Which is another reason we know it wasn't global. The Earth is not a flat surface under a dome with windows in it for water to pour through.

Well if you want to reject scripture that says it covered everything, every mountain it's on you. go see new geological evidences that prove that the earth crust contains more water than the seas. in any case, the lord can do anything he wants, why so much unbelief? why cant you believe what is written?

 

[The Barbarian]

Well if you want to reject scripture that says it covered everything,

Your revised interpretation is not scripture. Scripture is what God said, not you. And as you learned, God never said the flood was global or even world-wide. If He intended to say so, He would have done so.

go see new geological evidences that prove that the earth crust contains more water than the seas.

Which means nothing. The energy needed to extract that water from the rocks in which it's chemically and physically held, would have boiled the seas.

in any case, the lord can do anything he wants

Which doesn't mean that He did everything you want. Calling in unscriptural miracles to clean up the problems in your beliefs would make any belief acceptable.

Why can't you just accept it as written?

 

[JesusFollowerForever]

You do not know what you re talking about, I quoted scripture it was not an interpretation, no need to reply, wont be back on this thread.

 

[The Barbarian]

You do not know what you re talking about

I just showed you that your imaginary water from the Earth would have required so much energy that it would have boiled the seas. And I showed you that God did not say the flood was global. Those are just modern man's revision of his word to make it more acceptable to them.

I quoted scripture it was not an interpretation

Your "global" addition is not in scripture. If God meant "the world was flooded", He would have used "world." But He said the land was flooded..
The rest is your additions.

wont be back on this thread

But you're now a bit better-informed.