Global Flood?

1whirlwind

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2009
4,890
155
✟5,815.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Yes, all flesh on the earth, Hebrew S#0127, a synonym for ground. Everyone that was on the ground died, which would not include those who fled into the mountains. As I previously mentioned, even Jewish historical records mention people fleeing the flood, and also people coming down to meet Noah and his sons after the flood. The text does not say the flood covered the entire planet.



Genesis 7:21-23 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
So to you the earth/ground wouldn't cover the rocks on a mountain and it would therefore be disqualified as a place of all flesh being destroyed?


Please consider that "those coming down to meet Noah" were those on the ark with him.



That Greek word does not mean world, it means age. The disciples were simply asking about the destruction of the second temple that Jesus just mentioned in the previous verse, which would be the end of that age of Israel, as they no doubt knew their history of the destruction of the first temple. Zep 1 and Jer 4 use the same kinds of prophetic language to describe the destruction of the first temple as Matthew 24 does the second temple. Jesus says that people should flee when the time comes, and some of the people alive then would see this all come to pass. Clearly Matthew 24 has nothing to do with the end of the world.



Yes I know it means age for I wrote in my previous post....."This generation" is the final generation, the generation in which "all these things be fulfilled." The generation of the great tribulation...the generation living at "the end of the world," the end of this world age."



The disciples asked, not only about the temple, but....
Matthew 24:3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?

To me, that is clearly much more than them asking about the temple which by the way has not yet been thrown down as He described it....
Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.


There are many huge literal stones still standing "one upon another." But, at the end of this world age...they shall be "thrown down," and by that I don't mean literal stones. Rather they are the stones now supporting Babylon the great harlot....


Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

18:12 The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,

18:16 And saying, Alas, alas that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!


Those are the great stones presently misleading the world and...they shall be thrown down!


.
 
Upvote 0

Verticordious

Newbie
Sep 4, 2010
896
42
Columbus, Ohio
✟8,768.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Genesis 7:21-23 And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man: All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died. And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
So to you the earth/ground wouldn't cover the rocks on a mountain and it would therefore be disqualified as a place of all flesh being destroyed?


Please consider that "those coming down to meet Noah" were those on the ark with him.







Yes I know it means age for I wrote in my previous post....."This generation" is the final generation, the generation in which "all these things be fulfilled." The generation of the great tribulation...the generation living at "the end of the world," the end of this world age."



The disciples asked, not only about the temple, but....
Matthew 24:3 And as He sat upon the mount of Olives, the disciples came unto Him privately, saying, Tell us, when shall these things be? and what shall be the sign of Thy coming, and of the end of the world?

To me, that is clearly much more than them asking about the temple which by the way has not yet been thrown down as He described it....
Matthew 24:2 And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.


There are many huge literal stones still standing "one upon another." But, at the end of this world age...they shall be "thrown down," and by that I don't mean literal stones. Rather they are the stones now supporting Babylon the great harlot....
Revelation 17:4 And the woman was arrayed in purple and scarlet colour, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls, having a golden cup in her hand full of abominations and filthiness of her fornication:

18:12 The merchandise of gold, and silver, and precious stones, and of pearls, and fine linen, and purple, and silk, and scarlet, and all thyine wood, and all manner vessels of ivory, and all manner vessels of most precious wood, and of brass, and iron, and marble,

18:16 And saying, Alas, alas that great city, that was clothed in fine linen, and purple, and scarlet, and decked with gold, and precious stones, and pearls!


Those are the great stones presently misleading the world and...they shall be thrown down!
Revelation doesn't have anything to do with determining what Jesus was talking about here. If Matthew 24 is talking about the end of the world, then it would be determined from it's own context.

  • Matthew 23:13-33: Jesus lists the sins of Jerusalem.
  • Matthew 23:34-35: Prophets will be sent to Jerusalem, but Jerusalem will reject and kill them. The blood of the righteous will be on their hands.
  • Matthew 23:36: Jesus states that all of these things will come upon this generation (the people alive then).
  • Matthew 23:37-39: Jesus declares that Jerusalem's house is being left desolate. (meaning that it will be destroyed)
  • Matthew 24:1: Jesus left temple, then his disciples point at the magnificence of temple buildings to him.
  • Matthew 24:2: Jesus that all these things (which refers to the buildings), and tells them that not even a single stone will be left upon one another (the literal stones of the temple).
  • Matthew 24:3: The disciples ask Jesus when these things would happen and what sign of his coming, and the end of the age.
  • Matthew 24:16: He tells them that those in Judah must flee. (Why only Judah if it's the end of the world, and what good will fleeing do if it's the end of the world?)
  • Matthew 24:34: Jesus again states that these things will be seen by this generation of people who were alive at that time would see all these events happened. (The destruction of Jerusalem occurred ~40 years later, thus this prediction came true).
Perhaps the passages in Revelation may be referring to the end of the world, I don't know, as it's been quite a while since I've read though it. If they are, then it may also be the case that Revelation uses similar language that was used to describe the destruction of the second temple here, which would also make it similar to the the language used to describe the destruction of the first temple. In Matthew 24, however, it is clear Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple. The meaning the disciples question about the end of the "world" is made clear by the context of Jesus declaring that Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed. The entire context is about the sins of Jerusalem, and the judgement that is about to come upon them. It has nothing to do with the end of the world.

To those living in Judah it may have seemed to them like the end of the world. When prophets of God come to your city, you kill them, and then only a few years later the Roman army comes and besieges your city with no hope for you to escape, it will certainly feel like the end of the world to you. Knowing that God tried to warn you to turn from your evil ways, yet you did not listen, and now his has brought his judgement down upon you. I don't imagine that anything could be as frightening as that. However, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, life goes on. While the world will no-doubt in at some point in the future, it certainly did not end in 70 AD.
 
Upvote 0
S

Servant of Jesus

Guest
Models have to be consistent with what we know about the structure of the earth.

Right on- when we eventually come to know the truth, there will be no conflict between science and God's creation.

------------------------------------------------------

A very plausible theory concerning how the Biblical flood may have occurred, was first described in the research published in the 1970's by oceanographer Dr. Kenneth J. Hsu, and then by the more recent research paper published in Nature in 2009 by Daniel Garcia-Castellanos, is that it was actually a massive flood that affected ONLY the entire Mediterranean Ocean basin, which was where mankind is thought to have orginated.

This theory is widely supported by considerable geologic evidence, which suggests that the northward movement of the African plate once closed off the Gibraltar Strait. Since more water evaporates off the surface of the Mediterranean Ocean than flows into it from rivers, closure of the Straits of Gibraltar would have caused the Mediterranean to dry up- forcing the early civilizations that lived in this area to move down into the basin as the water level dropped and dropped and dropped.

Eventually, continuing plate motion caused downwarping of the earth's crust at Gibraltar, allowing Atlantic ocean water to catastrophically flow back in and fill the Mediterranean Ocean basin- which would have wiped out all the people living there.

The possibility of a massive, but not global, flood that wiped out all of civilization that existed at that time may be supported by a verse in the New Testament:

2 Peter 2:
5 if he did not spare the ancient world when he brought the flood on its ungodly people. So here, the Bible appears to be referring to only the ancient world where people lived, and not the entire earth.

Here is a well written summary, complete with many references, that explains this further: The Mediterranean Flood.

-----------------------------

The early history of the earth, when plate tectonic activity first started, may provide another, probably less plausible, explanation of how the Biblical flood may have occurred.

When the Chinese climbed Chomolunga (as they call Everest) in 1975, they brought back rocks from the summit that had fossil shells- indicating that either ocean water had covered the summit, or that the summit rocks were originally formed below sea level.

Plate tectonic theory today holds that the latter is most likely true- that the rocks that make up the Himalayas were originally formed in a shallow sea (the Tethys Sea) sandwiched between the Indian and Asian continents, and were pushed up as these two land masses collided.

But what is interesting here is that before plate tectonic activity started, mountain building processes were not yet active, and so the earth must have been quite flat. As a matter of fact, if ocean water was as abundant as it now is, the entire surface of the earth may originally have been entirely below sea level- and the first dry land would only have formed after plate tectonic activity started.

So if the Biblical flood had occurred just after the first land mass appeared above the ocean surface, it wouldn't have taken much of a storm to entirely inundate the new land area; much like Bangladesh is so badly flooded when an Indian ocean typhoon or tsunami occurs.

Now paleontologists are quick to point out that there is no evidence that people were present on the new land when the first continent was formed, so linking Noah's adventure to an early period of the earth's history, when only a small amount of easily-flooded dry land was available, is speculative.

-----------------

So my point here is to show that the description of the Biblical flood is a classic example of where a better interpretation of the Bible and a better understanding of science has led to a reconciliation of ideas that at one point seemed diametrically opposite.


.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

1whirlwind

Senior Member
Jun 26, 2009
4,890
155
✟5,815.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Revelation doesn't have anything to do with determining what Jesus was talking about here. If Matthew 24 is talking about the end of the world, then it would be determined from it's own context.


Jesus and understanding is found in the Scriptures (plural). There is One Author and His story is given us from the beginning to the revealing. In other words, there is no "it's own context" in one book for they all flow together.


Matthew 22:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, Ye do err, not knowing the scriptures, nor the power of God.

26:54 But how then shall the scriptures be fulfilled, that thus it must be?


  • Matthew 23:13-33: Jesus lists the sins of Jerusalem.
  • Matthew 23:34-35: Prophets will be sent to Jerusalem, but Jerusalem will reject and kill them. The blood of the righteous will be on their hands.
Jerusalem's sins are still being listed today. Prophets are still sent and are being rejected today. The blood of the righteous will be on all of our hands if we don't warn those we are given to warn. Please understand just who Jerusalem is for the literal city is symbolic of God's children.





  • Matthew 23:36: Jesus states that all of these things will come upon this generation (the people alive then).
The "this generation" is the generation when all that He spoke of will culminate...the last generation, the generation of the fig tree.


  • Matthew 23:37-39: Jesus declares that Jerusalem's house is being left desolate. (meaning that it will be destroyed)
It doesn't mean the house is destroyed but that it is desolate and that desolation is caused by those to whom He is speaking. That same desolation of His house continues today for within our house are the same hypocrites:

Matthew 23:27-29 Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye are like unto whited sepulchres, which indeed appear beautiful outward, but are within full of dead men's bones, and of all uncleanness. Even so ye also outwardly appear righteous unto men, but within ye are full of hypocrisy and iniquity. Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! because ye build the tombs of the prophets, and garnish the sepulchres of the righteous,

  • Matthew 24:1: Jesus left temple, then his disciples point at the magnificence of temple buildings to him.
  • Matthew 24:2: Jesus that all these things (which refers to the buildings), and tells them that not even a single stone will be left upon one another (the literal stones of the temple).
Note that it is the "buildings of the temple" and not the temple alone being spoken of and that includes all the grounds. The great wall standing today is part of the grounds and it stands...one stone upon another. 70AD wasn't the "end of the world" Jesus was teaching of.

That concerned the literal but the literal is a shadow of the spiritual and we are to see the spiritual.
11 Corinthians 3:6 Who also hath made us able ministers of the new testament; not of theletter, but of the spirit: for the letter killeth, but the spirit giveth life.
So understanding that we are the temple and that the stones aren't literal is important....

1 Corinthians 3:16-17 Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you? If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are.

Matthew 21:41 Jesus saith unto them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes?

As Jesus is not a literal stone...the stones of the temple aren't literal either.

  • Matthew 24:3: The disciples ask Jesus when these things would happen and what sign of his coming, and the end of the age.
  • Matthew 24:16: He tells them that those in Judah must flee. (Why only Judah if it's the end of the world, and what good will fleeing do if it's the end of the world?)


From what or whom are His children to flee? From Satan and his deception now and at the time of the great tribulation which is....great deception! Just before the end of this world age...Satan's great tribulation takes place. We must recognize the lies (flee from them) in order to remain a child of God.


  • Matthew 24:34: Jesus again states that these things will be seen by this generation of people who were alive at that time would see all these events happened. (The destruction of Jerusalem occurred ~40 years later, thus this prediction came true).
But He doesn't say that Verticordious. It is the final generation, the generation experiencing all that He detailed in that chapter.


Perhaps the passages in Revelation may be referring to the end of the world, I don't know, as it's been quite a while since I've read though it. If they are, then it may also be the case that Revelation uses similar language that was used to describe the destruction of the second temple here, which would also make it similar to the the language used to describe the destruction of the first temple. In Matthew 24, however, it is clear Jesus is talking about the destruction of Jerusalem and the second temple. The meaning the disciples question about the end of the "world" is made clear by the context of Jesus declaring that Jerusalem and the temple would be destroyed. The entire context is about the sins of Jerusalem, and the judgement that is about to come upon them. It has nothing to do with the end of the world.

To those living in Judah it may have seemed to them like the end of the world. When prophets of God come to your city, you kill them, and then only a few years later the Roman army comes and besieges your city with no hope for you to escape, it will certainly feel like the end of the world to you. Knowing that God tried to warn you to turn from your evil ways, yet you did not listen, and now his has brought his judgement down upon you. I don't imagine that anything could be as frightening as that. However, as far as the rest of the world is concerned, life goes on. While the world will no-doubt in at some point in the future, it certainly did not end in 70 AD.



No, the world age didn't end in 70AD. The temple stands today for we are the temple and stones remain, one stone upon another.




.
 
Upvote 0

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Once I debated this evolutionist who said that he saw no evidence of a global flood that once covered the earth.

He was writing to me from Hawaii.;)

mauna_kea_380h.jpg
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
296
✟15,392.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
After hundreds of years of geological research, we kinda have a REALLY good idea about how the Hawaiian islands and other volcanic arcs formed. They are formed as a continental plate moves over a stationary volcanic plume ("hot spot"), which causes the plate to well up and form island chains, such that the island furthest from the hot spot is the oldest and that nearest the hot spot is the youngest. Like this:

hawaiiPacPlate.gif


Hawaii is most certainly not a flooded continent. That's why I didn't get the joke -- because to someone with a degree in geology, it didn't make any sense.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Boy: Hey, gramps. We been crossing this ocean for 15 days and ain't seen nothin but water. When are we gonna get there?

Grampa: Grandson, we'll get there when we get there.

Boy: O.K. but can you tell me again where there is evidence for a world wide flood that once destroyed the earth?

Grampa: (slowly gazes at grandson) ???

usfl4020.jpeg
 
Upvote 0

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Scientist talking to a creationist while climbing near the summit of the Andes Mountains:

Professor: So you really believe in the Genesis flood stuff?

Creationist: Sure do.

Professor: And where do you find evidence for such a claim?

Creationist: All over the earth.

Professor: That's ridiculous. Do you really think that water covered these mountains? Do you realize how high they are?

Creationist: Say what's that laying there? It's looks like....

Professor: Uh, it's a...group of...clams!

giant_clams.jpg


Creationist: ;)
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
296
✟15,392.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Boy: Hey, gramps. We been crossing this ocean for 15 days and ain't seen nothin but water. When are we gonna get there?

Grampa: Grandson, we'll get there when we get there.

Boy: O.K. but can you tell me again where there is evidence for a world wide flood that once destroyed the earth?

Grampa: (slowly gazes at grandson) ???

usfl4020.jpeg
So... the mere existence of oceans is evidence that the entire surface of the earth was once flooded by them? How does that follow? One could just as easily argue that the mere existence of vast deserts is evidence that the entire surface of the earth was once covered by them.
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
296
✟15,392.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Scientist talking to a creationist while climbing near the summit of the Andes Mountains:

Professor: So you really believe in the Genesis flood stuff?

Creationist: Sure do.

Professor: And where do you find evidence for such a claim?

Creationist: All over the earth.

Professor: That's ridiculous. Do you really think that water covered these mountains? Do you realize how high they are?

Creationist: Say what's that laying there? It's looks like....

Professor: Uh, it's a...group of...clams!

giant_clams.jpg


Creationist: ;)
To continue your anecdote...

Professor: Say, if we look even closer, we see that these clam fossils occur not only on the surface of this mountain, but within the mountain! In fact, they form the rock this mountain is made of. It's almost as though the rock was formed first with the fossils inside, and subsequently uplifted by tectonic forces. How do creationists explain this?

Creationist: :confused:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Professor: So you actually believe that Mt Everest was under water by Noah's flood?

Creationist: Yup.

Professor: That's ridiculous. Do you realize what would have happened IF the world was covered by water that high?

Creationist: What's that?

Professor: Why, even if Noah and his family were on the ark as you believe, they would die from atomospheric pressure and...

Creationist: Plate tectonics...the mountains perhaps were not that high until they were thrust upward.

Professor: That's stupid. Plate tectonics doesn't work like...say...what's that?

Creationist: a diagram of the Alps. They are upside down.

Aug09262.jpg


Professor: That was caused by plate tectonics slowly over millions of year!

Creationist: uh.....riiiiight. :thumbsup:
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
296
✟15,392.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Professor: So you actually believe that Mt Everest was under water by Noah's flood?

Creationist: Yup.

Professor: That's ridiculous. Do you realize what would have happened IF the world was covered by water that high?

Creationist: What's that?

Professor: Why, even if Noah and his family were on the ark as you believe, they would die from atomospheric pressure and...

Creationist: Plate tectonics...the mountains perhaps were not that high until they were thrust upward.

Professor: That's stupid. Plate tectonics doesn't work like...say...what's that?

Creationist: a diagram of the Alps. They are upside down.

Aug09262.jpg


Professor: That was caused by plate tectonics!

Creationist: uh.....riiiiight. :thumbsup:
So... if you now accept that plate tectonics can account for the occurrence of marine fossils on mountains, can you please remind me why you have to invoke a global flood?
 
Upvote 0

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Professor: You know those clams don't prove these mountains were under water don't you?

Creationist: Oh? Explain please.

Professor: Why they even find clams inside the mountains!

giant_clams.jpg


Creationist: Alas, perhaps you're right. I must be wrong. They obviously all crawled there...

Professor: Right, and...

Creationist: From that ocean down there miles away.

Professor: Of course! I mean...uh...wait a minute.:idea:

Creationist: ^_^
 
Upvote 0

Mallon

Senior Veteran
Mar 6, 2006
6,109
296
✟15,392.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Private
Professor: You know those clams don't prove these mountains were under water don't you?

Creationist: Oh? Explain please.

Professor: Why they even find clams inside the mountains!

giant_clams.jpg


Creationist: Alas, perhaps you're right. I must be wrong. They obviously all crawled there...

Professor: Right, and...

Creationist: From that ocean down there miles away.

Professor: Of course! I mean...uh...wait a minute.:idea:

Creationist: ^_^
That didn't even make sense in light of the fact that you just accepted that plate tectonics can account for fossils on mountains just a moment ago. Are you even thinking about what you're saying???
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Calypsis4

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2009
564
22
Midwest USA
✟1,142.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Boy: Wow, grandpa, this canyon is a pretty big one. Why'd you bring me here?

Grandpa: Cuz I want you to see how canyons are made.

StHelensCanyon.jpg


Boy: This must be the 'Grand Canyon' they tell us about at school. It musta took jillions of yrs to get like this, right grandpa?

Grandpa: Nope. It's the canyon caused by Mount St. Helens and it was carved out in one day, the day of the eruption in 1980.

Boy: You mean that stream of water didn't carve it out over jillions of yrs?

Grandpa: Nope. It happened in a very short time.

Boy: What's that picture you got there in your hand, grandpa?

Grandpa: A picture of the Grand Canyon.

innergorge.jpg


Boy: Wow, it's a lot bigger. I guess it took a few more days to make that canyon, huh, gramps?

Grandpa: :thumbsup: You're catching on fast, boy.
 
Upvote 0