"Local" Biblical flood dismissed

[zeke37]

some folks think there is an apparent contradiction....

the bible details in Genesis, both before and after the flood
suggest that the flood was not global.

so, i have to believe it is not global.
....all the earth/land/area...
it really could just mean localized to the 'adamic valey".

what is certain, is those that knew of God, and disobeyed,
were destroyed in the flood, (save Noah and Cain's lineage).

 

[dollarsbill]

some folks think there is an apparent contradiction....

the bible details in Genesis, both before and after the flood
suggest that the flood was not global.

so, i have to believe it is not global.
....all the earth/land/area...
it really could just mean localized to the 'adamic valey".

what is certain, is those that knew of God, and disobeyed,
were destroyed in the flood, (save Noah and Cain's lineage).

Then why didn't God just tell Noah to move rather than spending many years building the HUGE ark and saving animals?

 

[gluadys]

Then why didn't God just tell Noah to move rather than spending many years building the HUGE ark and saving animals?

Because that wouldn't be a memorable story.

 

[shernren]

Then why didn't God just tell Noah to move rather than spending many years building the HUGE ark and saving animals?

Why doesn't God just move us to Heaven rather than spending two thousand years building the HUGE Church and saving people?

 

[dollarsbill]

Because that wouldn't be a memorable story.

The Flood a story? The Bible presents as literal.

 

[dollarsbill]

Why doesn't God just move us to Heaven rather than spending two thousand years building the HUGE Church and saving people?

What does that have to do with the Flood?

 

[Keachian]

The Flood a story? The Bible presents as literal.

Did I tell you about the story of Barack Obama stirring up North Koreans because he had binoculars at a South Korean outpost along the DMZ?

 

[ebia]

The Flood a story? The Bible presents as literal.

Does it? Where?

 

[dollarsbill]

Does it? Where?

Wherever it's mentioned.

 

[Keachian]

Wherever it's mentioned.

Really? I've seen it used as a warning, pretty much everywhere it is mentioned.

Are you saying we can't warn our children about telling lies by telling them the story of the Boy who cried wolf because it's not a real story?

 

[Jase]

The Flood a story? The Bible presents as literal.

A local flood that the story is based on was likely literal. The entire hyperbolic elements to the story such as covering the entire planet and building an Ark that was absolutely incapable of floating, while filling it with millions of species of animals and bobbing around in the ocean with asteroids, and 1000 foot waves crashing around it most certainly is not literal.

 

[dollarsbill]

Really? I've seen it used as a warning, pretty much everywhere it is mentioned.

Indeed, a literal warning. Not a hint of not being literal.

Are you saying we can't warn our children about telling lies by telling them the story of the Boy who cried wolf because it's not a real story?

If you present that story as true then you would be lying. What would that teach a kid?

 

[dollarsbill]

A local flood that the story is based on was likely literal. The entire hyperbolic elements to the story such as covering the entire planet and building an Ark that was absolutely incapable of floating, while filling it with millions of species of animals and bobbing around in the ocean with asteroids, and 1000 foot waves crashing around it most certainly is not literal.

How much of the Bible do you believe to be literal?

 

[Keachian]

Indeed, a literal warning. Not a hint of not being literal.

It hardly needs to be literal to be a warning and there doesn't seem to be much difference between Jesus using it and the prophecies around it in Matthew 24, in fact I would argue that the "prophecies" of Matt 24:36ff don't necessarily have to come true exactly but rather again that they are a warning about being faithful and watchful.

If you present that story as true then you would be lying. What would that teach a kid?

You miss the point, things don't need to be literal to be true, I'd certainly class the "Boy who cried Wolf" as a true story.

 

[ebia]

Wherever it's mentioned.

Doesn't say "this is literal" or equivalent in any reference to it in any version I'm familiar with.

 

[ebia]

Indeed, a literal warning. Not a hint of not being literal.

The warning is real; that doesn't imply the story is literal.

We refer to stories all the time without making any attempt to indicate whether they are literal or not.

 

[dollarsbill]

Nobody has yet given any Biblical evidence that the Flood was not literal. So it must be literal.

 

[philadiddle]

Nobody has yet given any Biblical evidence that the Flood was not literal. So it must be literal.

God flooded the world by opening the windows in the sky. Are they literal windows? Do you have biblical evidence to suggest that they are metaphor? If not, then we must believe there are actually windows in the sky.

 

[dollarsbill]

God flooded the world by opening the windows in the sky. Are they literal windows? Do you have biblical evidence to suggest that they are metaphor? If not, then we must believe there are actually windows in the sky.

Surely you're not suggesting that there is only one kind of window?

 

[philadiddle]

Surely you're not suggesting that there is only one kind of window?

Do you have biblical support to show it meant something else? Please provide it.