Was the biblical flood symbolic of something or literally a physical flood? How can we tell?

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
We could say that there is a tiny chance that the whole Bible is fiction, although that charge has been raised repeatedly by critics and has been disproved again and again. But when it comes to the book of Revelation, that account is not presented in the same way as the Gospels or other books.

It says, right up front, that this is a vision being recounted by John. The book itself, in other words, tells us not to take the contents literally.

Consequently, we should realize that it is revelation and teaches important matters, but not that it is literally accurate in every detail and specific sight that John saw while he was in that state. Most is an analogy or representational, which however doesn't mean that the message conveyed isn't true.

But that's about Revelation. As for Genesis and the flood, there isn't any reason to doubt that it actually happened, not unless a person insists that it must have covered every inch of land, everywhere on Earth. For it to have devastated a large area of the Middle East, all that the writer of the book knew of, is sufficient.
 
Last edited:
  • Agree
Reactions: Joyous Song
Upvote 0

Tolworth John

Well-Known Member
Supporter
Mar 10, 2017
8,278
4,680
68
Tolworth
✟369,559.00
Country
United Kingdom
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
The book of revelations has symbolic events in it, why not genesis?

Was Jesus lying when he referred to the events in genesis?

If he was how was he able to be the sinless sacrifice for our sins?

Otherwise he told the truth about historical facts.
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
What was the symbolic meaning of the flood?

That there is only path to salvation. Best be onboard the boat.
(And consider that Noah had no New Testament to argue about over dinner)
 
Upvote 0

Truthspeaker72362

Active Member
May 27, 2020
41
7
24
IL
✟12,238.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Single
That there is only path to salvation. Best be onboard the boat.
(And consider that Noah had no New Testament to argue about over dinner)
For that to be true it must mean that there was a symbolic meaning of "flood" and "ark". What were the symbolic meanings of those?
 
Upvote 0

SkyWriting

The Librarian
Supporter
Jan 10, 2010
37,279
8,499
Milwaukee
✟410,918.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
For that to be true it must mean that there was a symbolic meaning of "flood" and "ark". What were the symbolic meanings of those?
"Ark" is the promise that God will save, and the water is symbolic of the transition from this life to the next life.

(If you watch movies, the story changes dramatically after it rains and the character gets soaked.)
 
Upvote 0

DamianWarS

Follower of Isa Al Masih
Supporter
May 15, 2008
9,486
3,322
✟858,457.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Consequently, we should realize that it is revelation and teaches important matters, but not that it is literally accurate in every detail and specific sight that John saw while he was in that state. Most is an analogy or representational, which however doesn't mean that the message conveyed isn't true.
To answer these questions with Genesis we need to understand who wrote these accounts and how did they come upon this knowledge?

Tradition of course says Moses wrote Genesis and if he did it means Moses penned 2500 years of history prior to himself. creation at the most extreme at 2500 year but events like the flood would be closer to 1000 years. So these are not first-hand experiences that Moses wrote down and plausibly they were existing oral accounts, what God told him to write down or a bit of both. The entire book of Genesis is essentially pre-written history for the Hebrews so this needs to be considered when understanding the purpose beyond these accounts.

We know the Hebrews coming out of Egypt were predisposed to pagan practices and we quickly judge them for not following God's way but then what way did they know about God? The accounts of Abraham were their only knowledge of God and it would seem the Hebrews had a disorganized Fatih with no temples, priests, scripture or leadership over it. So what accounts did they tell their children about God? or about creation? and how were these accounts influenced by their more powerful neighbours who had a very organized faith?

I think it is plausible the task Moses had was to unify a broken Israel and de-paganize it. I have had a lot of experiences with different cultures from around the world and one thing I have learnt is you can't tell someone what they believe is wrong when they have been steeped in it for generations. It tends to make people react hostile to the gospel and you need to be sensitive with how you introduce the gospel. What I can imagine is several family/tribes have different versions of various accounts and some likely with pagan values embedded in. What I think Moses did was de-paganize the accounts and used them to retell the story to point to God and give God glory under the direction and authority of God. In this way, Moses tells them the accounts they grew up and they already had an identity with but orthodox versions with new revelation.

Pre-Abrahamic accounts are difficult and if this was any other people group/faith we would say it's complete fiction. So I rather not make a claim as to their literalness because I actually don't think it's important. I'm not talking about the entire bible I'm exclusively talking about Genesis or more specifically pre-Abrahamic accounts. I instead study the passages for their deeper meanings in the text and what they are pointing to. I'm not rejecting the literal I'm just not giving its literalness a priority in the accounts.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0

Albion

Facilitator
Dec 8, 2004
111,138
33,258
✟583,842.00
Country
United States
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Married
I like your presentation and I agree with most of it. But it does matter if the great flood is meant literally or not because people will deny the inspiration of Scripture by pointing out that it would be impossible for the whole world to have been covered by flood waters up to the top of the mountains and, for that matter, for the writer of the account to know one way or the other. It most certainly is that his world was completely flooded, which doesn't lessen the impact or meaning in the least.
 
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

Rachel20

Well-Known Member
May 30, 2020
1,954
1,443
STX
✟58,109.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The book of revelations has symbolic events in it, why not genesis?

I believe Genesis has great symbolic prophecy, mainly in the form of typology. Isaac as a type of Christ, who carried the wood to his own sacrifice (tho stopped at last minute), and his father telling him that God will provide himself a lamb. Or Rebecca, Isaacs wife, a type of "church" which the unnamed servant went out to seek for Isaac (reminiscent of the Holy Spirit who would not speak of himself John 16:13). And Jacob, probably a "type" of us all! And the animal skins made for Adam/Eve after they had fallen, the first shedding of blood in scripture provided for a covering.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2PhiloVoid
Upvote 0