Explanation for the Biblical flood and acceptance of the Bible doctrine on origins

[BobRyan]

God is the "Creationist" that gave us Genesis 1 and 2 with its seven day literal time scale for the origin of all life on Earth. He also gave us the history of the flood event.

Here is a video that addresses a number of very common questions on Noah's Ark and the flood (as well as some comments on creation week).

How nice that the legal code of Ex 20:11 affirms the literal 7 day week of Genesis 2:1-3 and sets it on par with the 7 day week at Sinai.

(some folks might choose to ignore all the details in Ex 20:11 because it is found in the Sabbath commandment and so needs to be ignored. This reference above is however - about the detail of the 7 day week of Gen 2:1-3 as referenced in non-symbolic legal code of Ex 20:11.. which of course some will find "inconvenient")

That removes all confusion that critics sometimes try to insert into the text.

 

[BobRyan]

It is pretty normal to find that people who accept God's account for that history in the Bible never come up with "bible objections".

Objections to things like
1. The virgin birth
2. the literal resurrection of Christ
3. The miracles of Christ
4. The flood account
5. The creation account in Gen 1-2 and also in Ex 20:11

never come from the Bible. They are always something external to the Bible with a very different world view trying to "adjust" the Bible account - very often "by a lot".

Those who embrace the historic account we find in scripture will love that video -- others probably won't watch ... each one has free will and can choose as they wish.

 

[coffee4u]

It is pretty normal to find that people who accept God's account for that history in the Bible never come up with "bible objections".

Objections to things like
1. The virgin birth
2. the literal resurrection of Christ
3. The miracles of Christ
4. The flood account
5. The creation account in Gen 1-2 and also in Ex 20:11

never come from the Bible. They are always something external to the Bible with a very different world view trying to "adjust" the Bible account - very often "by a lot".

Those who embrace the historic account we find in scripture will love that video -- others probably won't watch ... each one has free will and can choose as they wish.

Good point Bob. We may disagree on some things but not these basics.

I notice people who do not accept Genesis 1-2 as it is written also do not accept the flood as written and this often leads to other areas becoming spirtulized into some kind of mystical message instead of plain reality. As if everything God ever spoke was some kind of shrouded mystery requiring a priest or some other 'enlightened' person to decipher it for them.

I will save that video and come back tomorrow with my thoughts on it.

 

[Sir Joseph]

That's a good video I've previously watched and noted BobRyan. Glad you put it into a thread here. There are other good videos available on the ark feasibility and global flood that all believers would do well to watch since it's a common point of attack against the Bible. For anyone interested, I'll add another one here that details one of the many models demonstrating the ark's capabilities for accomplishing the Bible's Noahic account.

Unfortunately, too many Christians today are accepting the evolutionary world view that rejects the historicity of Genesis, not understanding that doing so undermines the entire foundation of their faith. Rather than dismissing the Genesis creation and flood accounts based upon unfounded secular teachings and skepticism, people would be wiser and more prudent studying the scientific evidence that actually supports the Bible's historical accounts. It's always been there, but few seem interested in seeking such truth.

 

[Diamond7]

God is the "Creationist" that gave us Genesis 1 and 2 with its seven day literal time scale for the origin of all life on Earth. He also gave us the history of the flood event.

In Kabbalah, a mystical branch of Judaism, a day can indeed be seen as representing all time and all stories. Kabbalistic teachings often interpret biblical stories and events in a symbolic or metaphorical way, and the creation story in Genesis is no exception. In this context, the six days of creation described in Genesis can be understood as representing different stages in the process of creation and the unfolding of God's divine plan. Each day can be seen as encompassing all time and all stories, symbolizing the way in which all of creation is interconnected and part of a larger, divine plan.

 

[GenemZ]

God is the "Creationist" that gave us Genesis 1 and 2 with its seven day literal time scale for the origin of all life on Earth. He also gave us the history of the flood event.

Here is a video that addresses a number of very common questions on Noah's Ark and the flood (as well as some comments on creation week).

How nice that the legal code of Ex 20:11 affirms the literal 7 day week of Genesis 2:1-3 and sets it on par with the 7 day week at Sinai.

That removes all confusion that critics sometimes try to insert into the text.

Genesis One begins with a universal flood.

Why was it flooded the first time?

Genesis 1:2 in the Hebrew is being kept from many of us as to its translation and meaning.

"But the planet earth was desolate and empty, and darkness was over the raging waters
but the Spirit of God radiated heat on the face/surface of the frozen waters." ​

The prehistoric world was first destroyed in that universal flood.

On the other hand, Noah's flood was not needing to be universal.

For, Noah's flood was only needed to serve God's purpose of wiping out evil mankind.

And Jehovah said, I will destroy man whom I have created from the face
of the ground; both man, and beast, and creeping things, and birds of the heavens;
for I regret that I ever made them.”
Gen 6:7​

Man was only in his infancy and only inhabited a small portion of the earth at that time. The flood to serve God's purpose needed not be universal in Noah's day.

We need to make sense out of this.


grace and peace ..........

 

[BobRyan]

Genesis One begins with a universal flood.

The term flood is not there in Gen 1.

Gen 1 says the earth was covered by water but does not say it was a flood.

Flood implies a dry condition that is then overrun by a lot of water. That idea is not in any of Genesis 1 - for the earth

So for example we never say "the middle of the Pacific Ocean was flooded today"

 

[GenemZ]

The term flood is not there.

It says the earth was covered by water but does not say it was a flood.

Flood implies a dry condition that is then overrun by a lot of water. That idea is not in any of Genesis 1 - for the earth

So for example we never say "the middle of the Pacific Ocean was flooded today"

That's one way to look at it.........

 

[BobRyan]

The term flood is not there in Gen 1.

Gen 1 says the earth was covered by water but does not say it was a flood.

Flood implies a dry condition that is then overrun by a lot of water. That idea is not in any of Genesis 1 - for the earth

So for example we never say "the middle of the Pacific Ocean was flooded today"

That's one way to look at it.........

It's a way to see how the details affect the understanding of the text.

 

[GenemZ]

It's a way to see how the details affect the understanding of the text.

How much text do you understand?

Have you studied it with the help of Bible scholars who know there is much more to be seen than we get in mainstream translations.

I will give you one example of what I mean.

"The earth was without form, and void; and darkness was on the face of the deep.
And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters."​

Genesis 1:2 is usually translated as to accommodate easy reading. The typical rendering is very weak compared to the original.

But, do you know where the original Hebrew found in Genesis 1:2 reappears in the OT? Jeremiah 4:23!

Jeremiah used Genesis 1:2 as a warning concerning the utter destruction of the Jews who were rebelling in Jeremiah's day!
Jeremiah even had to tame it down a bit to let the Jews that they would not end up in utter destruction like is found in the Hebrew of Genesis 1:2.

I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.
I looked at the mountains,
and they were quaking;
all the hills were swaying.
I looked, and there were no people;
every bird in the sky had flown away.
I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;
all its towns lay in ruins
before the Lord, before his fierce anger. ​

This is what the Lord says:​

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.​

The Jews understood the Hebrew!
Jeremiah using Genesis 1:2 was designed to strike fear in the rebellious ones!

This is typically how we become mislead by mainstream translations.

I looked at the earth,
and it was formless and empty;
and at the heavens,
and their light was gone.​

The Hebrew speaks of wreak and havoc, and everything laid waste.
That is why Jeremiah needed to add after using verse 23, verse 27!

“The whole land will be ruined,
though I will not destroy it completely.​

Why even say that if it were simply to mean a mild "empty and void?"

Jeremiah needed to tell them that they would not be utterly destroyed to let them know
the Jews would survive as a people
and not end up like was found in Genesis 1:2!


Something happened in Genesis 1:2 that too many have been denied the truth about.




In Christ .....................

 

[BobRyan]

How much text do you understand?

I understand that flood is found in Gen 6, Gen 7, Gen 8 , Gen 9 but not in Gen 1.
I understand that the Genesis concept of flood - is having dry land inundated by water.

6 Now Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water came upon the earth....
...
17 Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. 18 The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 And the water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. 20 The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. 21 So all creatures that moved on the earth perished: birds, livestock, animals, and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; 22 of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died.

Have you studied it with the help of Bible scholars

I have read enough to know the obvious details.

But, do you know where the original Hebrew found in Genesis 1:2 reappears in the OT? Jeremiah 4:23!

I do know that.

I looked at the earth,

and it was formless and empty;​

and at the heavens,​

and their light was gone.​

I looked at the mountains,​

and they were quaking;​

all the hills were swaying.​

I looked, and there were no people;​

every bird in the sky had flown away.​

I looked, and the fruitful land was a desert;​

all its towns lay in ruins​

before the Lord, before his fierce anger. ​

This is what the Lord says:​

“The whole land will be ruined,​

though I will not destroy it completely.​

Jer 4:20 Disaster upon disaster is proclaimed,
For the whole land is devastated;
Suddenly my tents are devastated,
And my curtains in an instant.

Jeremiah predicted future devastation in vs 20

In vs 23-26 he gives more details of a future devastation of the entire planet.

Jer 4:23 I looked at the earth, and behold, it was a formless and desolate emptiness;
And to the heavens, and they had no light.
24 I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking,
And all the hills jolted back and forth.
25 I looked, and behold, there was no human,
And all the birds of the sky had fled.
26 I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were pulled down
Before the Lord, before His fierce anger.

Jeremiah sees the future state of the Earth - the one that happens during the Millennium between Rev 19 and the part in Rev 20 with the lake of fire event that happens after the 1000 years of desolation

 

[GenemZ]

I understand that flood is found in Gen 6, Gen 7, Gen 8 , Gen 9 but not in Gen 1.
I understand that the Genesis concept of flood - is having dry land inundated by water.

6 Now Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of water came upon the earth....
...
17 Then the flood came upon the earth for forty days, and the water increased and lifted up the ark, so that it rose above the earth. 18 The water prevailed and increased greatly upon the earth, and the ark floated on the surface of the water. 19 And the water prevailed more and more upon the earth, so that all the high mountains everywhere under the heavens were covered. 20 The water prevailed fifteen cubits higher, and the mountains were covered. 21 So all creatures that moved on the earth perished: birds, livestock, animals, and every swarming thing that swarms upon the earth, and all mankind; 22 of all that was on the dry land, all in whose nostrils was the breath of the spirit of life, died.


I have read enough to know the obvious details.


I do know that.

Jer 4:20 Disaster upon disaster is proclaimed,
For the whole land is devastated;
Suddenly my tents are devastated,
And my curtains in an instant.

Jeremiah predicted future devastation in vs 20

In vs 23-26 he gives more details of a future devastation of the entire planet.

Jer 4:23 I looked at the earth, and behold, it was a formless and desolate emptiness;
And to the heavens, and they had no light.
24 I looked on the mountains, and behold, they were quaking,
And all the hills jolted back and forth.
25 I looked, and behold, there was no human,
And all the birds of the sky had fled.
26 I looked, and behold, the fruitful land was a wilderness,
And all its cities were pulled down
Before the Lord, before His fierce anger.

Jeremiah sees the future state of the Earth - the one that happens during the Millennium between Rev 19 and the part in Rev 20 with the lake of fire event that happens after the 1000 years of desolation

So? If Jeremiah was quoting such a terrible judgment as you claimed?

Yet? Even so to that? It would have to indicate that Genesis 1:2 still speaks of horrible devastation.

Why even should Jeremiah include it in the dialogue, if what you try to claimed were true? What did those rebellious Jews even know about the Millennium?

Something else makes no sense.

I showed you how Genesis 1:2 was applicable to indicate devastating judgment as Jeremiah used it. Which you just agreed to in application to the end of the Millennium...

Genesis 1:2 was prophesied in part against the rebellious Jews in Jeremiah's day. But, not with the same meaning where "tohu wa bohu" appears initially appeared in Genesis 1:2???????

Looks like you better re-think about what you are trying to change the application to. For you admitted its means utter destruction. But, then flipped when used in Genesis 1:2.


......... God is watching!

 

[Diamond7]

On the other hand, Noah's flood was not needing to be universal.

Noah's literal flood was local or the Bible uses the word: "Adamah" which means Eden. The plants and animals that Noah saved were domesticated. All the plants and animals in Eden.

 

[GenemZ]

Noah's literal flood was local or the Bible uses the word: "Adamah" which means Eden. The plants and animals that Noah saved were domesticated. All the plants and animals in Eden.

Mankind was kicked out of the Garden - Genesis 3:22-24. Not sure where you got that conclusion from.

 

[Diamond7]

Not sure where you got that conclusion from.

Mostly History & Science. It is called the Neolithic Revolution.

 

[GenemZ]

Mostly History & Science. It is called the Neolithic Revolution.

Secular History and Science (in this case) speculated. It stands contrary to the Word of God.

On the other hand... history and science is a great help in verifying about the Bible revealing that there was a prehistoric world.

 

[Diamond7]

Secular History and Science (in this case) speculated. It stands contrary to the Word of God.

There are things that science can not prove. Science can not disprove them also. For example the idea that people lived to be 1000 years before Noah's flood. It is possible that aging is a disease and it is possible that people did live longer back then. We have never found the remains of a person who has aged past the age of 30. So the evidence does indicate that the Bible is true in this regard.

 

[GenemZ]

There are things that science can not prove. Science can not disprove them also. For example the idea that people lived to be 1000 years before Noah's flood. It is possible that aging is a disease and it is possible that people did live longer back then. We have never found the remains of a person who has aged past the age of 30. So the evidence does indicate that the Bible is true in this regard.

Maybe the remains (by today's standards) appear much younger than we might assume. After all? If someone would live to be 900 years old? At age 700? His remains may appear to be like that of a 30 year old today....

 

[Diamond7]

His remains may appear to be like that of a 30 year old today....

Usually, when they find the remains of a body it is given to the morgue. They are the ones that have to identify it as being very old. They then turn it over to people that know what they are doing with ancient remains. With Cheddar man they were able to extract some of his DNA from his teeth. Even though he was said to be 10,000 years old. They actually found a living relative near to where they found him. His ancestors were still living near by and were notified that his remains had been found and that he was the victim of a murder. At least the found the cause of death was from an arrowhead.

I have studied all of these ancient remains that I can read up on. Cain was very justified when he was worried they would kill him. That is always the cause of death. Killed in their prime, no sign of any aging. I even have an open challenge for anyone anywhere to show me something different than this. The most interesting was the guy who had a little pouch on his belt with five different kinds of medicine. One was white willow bark, which is aspirin.

In the Bible, there are numerous references to plants and their healing properties, such as in Ezekiel 47:12, which states that "the fruit thereof shall be for food, and the leaf thereof for healing."

 

[Diamond7]

Secular History and Science (in this case) speculated. It stands contrary to the Word of God.

"It" stand contrary to the traditions of man. Also modern revisionism is contrary to History and Science.