- Feb 4, 2006
- 46,773
- 10,981
- Country
- United States
- Faith
- Protestant
- Marital Status
- Single
- Politics
- US-Others
Given the weather context here the most obvious reading is that it is a wind rather than a spirit, besides wouldn't the Spirit of the Lord, be called 'the Spirit of the Lord' or 'the Spirit of Elohim'? Even if it was some other type of spirit it would be described as 'a spirit of soemthingorother' or even a spirit from the Lord? Gen 1:3 And the Spirit of God was hovering over the face of the waters. Note as well how it is the Spirit of the Lord who is the subject and performs the action of hovering over the waters. In Gen 8 the wind is the object of the verb, made to blow by God. Gen 8:1 And God made a wind blow over the earth, and the waters subsided.
I don't see how the ocean floor could drop a couple of kilometers without causing massive tsunami. The earth's crust does not move gently and water is very good at sloshing about when it moves. But the story does not describe a shift in the ocean floor at all. It describes rain and artesian springs opening up as the cause of the flood and it ending when the wind blew and the rain stopped.
No matter how hard a wind blew it would not cause the waters to abate and return to their place. That's why I think the wind was a signal that the flooding was over, not a direct cause in any significant way (or maybe it was a fresh wind that blew the smell of rotting critters away from Noah). Here are verses in question:
1And God remembered Noah, and every living thing, and all the cattle that was with him in the ark: and God made a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters assuaged;
2The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained;
3And the waters returned from off the earth continually: and after the end of the hundred and fifty days the waters were abated.
God made a wind to "pass" over the earth, not "blow" as he did over the Red Sea. Then verses 2 and 3 describe the actually end of the flood.
The exact meaning of "the fountains of the great deep" is still vague. I believe it means the ocean waters and basins that contain them, not some other water hidden in the rocks somewhere. I believe the "breaking up" was the raising of the seafloor itself, not a sudden tectonic upheaval at the edges of the plates. Because the water came rather slowly (it took forty days for the flood water to reach the ark and lift it up) I believe the destructiveness (erosion and subsequent deposition) of the flood would not mimic usual flood models.
Regarding the height of the floodwater. Although it says the waters prevailed 15 cubits above the (tallest) peak this does not imply that the standing waters had to reach that height. Using the flood as a type of baptism the waters would only have to submerge the entire earth for a moment, and then only barely, as the "fifteen cubits" would indicate. A huge powerful cresting surge would accomplish this, especially if two or more met at the tallest peak. The word "prevail" indicates powerful activity, not the passivity of standing water. Also the story seems to indicate that as soon as the flood crested it began to abate. This would give credibility to the baptising nature of the flood. As soon as complete immersion was accomplished the baptismal process is complete. At the moment the highest peak was submerged the baptism was over and the waters began to recede, and the earth came up out of the waters purified. (I think you have to add the spiritual purpose/pattern/type to the story to fully understand it.)
owg
Last edited:
Upvote
0