Noah-Lots of Water in the Oceans and Subterranean Oceans

[Diamond72]

I can't imagine there being much difference in the text if for no other reason than the Jews were very meticulous when copying scrolls.

Hebrew letters have a numeric values. So they can count the numbers to see if they made a mistake.

The Dead Sea or Qumran scrolls contain portions of every book of the Hebrew Bible (aka Old Testament), except Esther, though there are numerous missing passages and words. There are many textual differences between the Qumran texts and their counterparts in current Hebrew Bibles.

We get our Bible from people we can rely and depend on. Not everyone can be considered reliable to know what is scriptural and what is not scripture. A lot of our Bible was oral tradition and people do not understand that.

 

[HarleyER]

Comes down to evidence, in the absence of any scriptural statement.

Well, the Scriptures tell us God created everything in six days and He flooded the entire world.

So what is it? Evidence or Scriptural statements?

 

[The Barbarian]

Well, the Scriptures tell us God created everything in six days and He flooded the entire world.

No, that's man's addition to His word. In fact, He specifically avoids using the world "world" (tebel).

And since Genesis 1 says they aren't literal 24 hour days, and since Genesis 2 says it happened in 1 "day", we can be sure that addition is not correct.

So what is it? Evidence or Scriptural statements?

As you see, evidence and scripture agree; it wasn't literal six days the the entire world was not flooded.

 

[HarleyER]

I'll see if I can find some resources on this. My impression is that, essentially, the further back in time you go, the more you find that much like today, even in deeper history, there have historically been multiple "Bibles" rather than just 1 Bible. Or similar to how we have different translations, there are different traditions. But sometimes they say different things.

Sometimes the LXX might have a verse that the MT does not, or vise versa. Sometimes they have a different number of verses. Or sometimes, different sources might say different things. Like in the above video.

Dr Heiser has a lot of good articles and content on this subject.

Thanks for the videos. I'll have to look at them tonight.

I'm in the process of setting up a meeting with a friend of mine who holds a doctorate in textual criticism and has written various articles on the matter. I will admit the more I try to find out about this, the more confused I get. Unfortunately, my friend has company this week so it may be awhile. However, I did entice him with a free breakfast. He can't resist food.

These videos will help me formulate my thoughts.

 

[HarleyER]

The point is that God restores the eyes to His plan and purpose. People are blind in a spiritual sense and that becomes manifest in the physical world. To accuse God goes back to Joseph Smith and Calvin. They say God wanted Adam and Eve to sin. They say it was God's plan for them to sin and that is not true.

To say God would cause someone to be broken or blind is simply NOT true. God wants to restore us. Jesus came to fix what was broken. Ezekiel 34 16 “I will seek what was lost and bring back what was driven away, bind up the broken and strengthen what was sick; but I will destroy the fat and the strong, and feed them in judgment.”

God wants us to turn away from our sin and live right before Him.

I had a good friend once that was blind. To suggest that God caused him to be blind is crazy.

John 9:1 As Jesus passed by, He saw a man who had been blind from birth. 2 And His disciples asked Him, “Rabbi, who sinned, this man or his parents, that he would be born blind?” 3 Jesus answered, “It was neither that this man sinned, nor his parents; but it was so that the works of God might be displayed in him.

God DIDN'T want Adam and Eve to sin. But God KNEW that as soon as He planted that tree in the Garden they would sin. We would never truly know the love of God and His glory unless we understood the depths of our sinfulness.

 

[HarleyER]

As you see, evidence and scripture agree; it wasn't literal six days the the entire world was not flooded.

What I see is someone who wants it both ways.

 

[Diamond72]

But God KNEW that as soon as He planted that tree in the Garden they would sin.

What causes you to believe that?

 

[DennisF]

Thank you for your comment.

It isn't ignorance that I'm speaking from. I find most Christians have absolutely such little faith in God and much faith in the world around them.

True enough.

The Scriptures are filled with examples of God function outside the physical laws, giving new eyes, floating ax handles, feeding over a million people for over forty years in the wilderness, raising from the death, on and on.

This is a Greek dualistic view of the physical world. The Hebrew biblical view sees the world as a single, coherent creation of God, who does not need to be in opposition to himself in how he upholds the world in order to accomplish his purposes. The pagan view is that the gods of various regions of nature are fickle in how they control it, making science impossible. In contrast, the Hebrew God has in scripture the major feature of hesed covenant faithfulness in that he is entirely reliable in keeping his obligations under the covenant with Israel (and others). This reliability carries over to his upholding of nature, which makes science possible. Scripture comments in multiple places on the trustworthiness of Yahweh in how he upholds creation.

Dualism is all over in contemporary Christianity, and has been since the influence of the Greek and Roman writings were rediscovered during the Middle Ages. It is most prevalent in the RC tradition, but Protestants and others have also been infected significantly by it. A lack of understanding of some scripture has led to "physical impossibilities" such as the ones you mentioned if understood as you took them. However, the axe handle event, for instance, has a rather straightforward explanation that does not require the physical world to be reconstituted by God.

God is not bound to "physical laws" nor what scientists tells Him (and us). He proved this over and over. Some just don't want to believe it looking for worldly rational explanations.

Physical explanations that preserve the integrity of God have a much better outcome relative to what is known by some of us about the physical world..

And I don't need to know Greek to understand that.

 

[Diamond72]

, floating ax handles

If you read the passage, he used a stick to find the axe. Of course that is what you would do is poke around with a stick. The miracle was that he found the axe and was able to retrieve it. The hebrew word וַיָּ֖צֶף does not mean float. It means to find or restore. He found the axe head and repaired or restored it. If I loan a tool I want it back in the condition I loaned it. I do not want them to bring back a broken tool for me to repair.

Notice the gospel message? What was lost is now found and not only found but restored. Was this a miracle? Yes. Is God a law breaker? Did He break His own laws? No. He simply redeemed and restored what was lost.

 

[HarleyER]

What causes you to believe that?

Why do I believe God knew Adam and Eve would sin once He planted the tree of knowledge? Simply because God is omniscient.

 

[HarleyER]

This is a Greek dualistic view of the physical world. The Hebrew biblical view sees the world as a single, coherent creation of God, who does not need to be in opposition to himself in how he upholds the world in order to accomplish his purposes.

Greek dualism is a philosophical and religious view that the universe is made up of two opposing forces or principles, such as good and evil, light and darkness, or body and mind

This is not Greek dualism. Nor is obedience to the laws of physical science the Hebrew biblical view. God works in harmony with His creation but not excluding Himself from that creation. When necessary, He will insert Himself into His creation to express His will as we saw with our Lord Jesus Christ.

We are told in Hebrews:

Hebrews 2: 3b....After it was at the first spoken through the Lord, it was confirmed to us by those who heard, 4 God also testifying with them, both by signs and wonders and by various miracles and by gifts of the Holy Spirit according to His own will.​

God interjects signs and wonders into His creation to confirm what He is telling us is true. His Word is confirmed by these various signs and wonders throughout history. The problem with signs and wonders is, as we see here, is that people start to doubt that it really happened. They question the flood. They question the creation. They question whether God could/would make a axe head float.

Signs and wonders are to confirm what is written in His Word is true. So when people start doubting the signs and wonders, they start questioning whether God's Word is true. The reason they doubt God's Word is true is simply because many Christians today don't believe God can do these things. And then they wonder why no one is coming to know Jesus Christ.

Matthew 13:58 And He did not do many miracles there because of their unbelief.

BTW-What I really see here is nothing more than humanism: a philosophy that usually rejects supernaturalism and stresses an individual's dignity and worth and capacity for self-realization through reason : secular humanism. It really has nothing to do with Greek dualism.

 

[HarleyER]

If you read the passage, he used a stick to find the axe. Of course that is what you would do is poke around with a stick. The miracle was that he found the axe and was able to retrieve it. The hebrew word וַיָּ֖צֶף does not mean float. It means to find or restore. He found the axe head and repaired or restored it. If I loan a tool I want it back in the condition I loaned it. I do not want them to bring back a broken tool for me to repair.

Notice the gospel message? What was lost is now found and not only found but restored. Was this a miracle? Yes. Is God a law breaker? Did He break His own laws? No. He simply redeemed and restored what was lost.

2 Kings 5:1 But as one was felling a beam, the axe head fell into the water; and he cried out and said, “Alas, my master! For it was borrowed.” 6 Then the man of God said, “Where did it fall?” And when he showed him the place, he cut off a stick and threw it in there, and made the iron float. 7 He said, “Take it up for yourself.” So he put out his hand and took it.

Elisha just threw the stick in. He didn't go around poking to find the head. The iron floated. Next, I suppose you would like to tell me Israel crossed over the Red Sea in 2 feet of water.

PS-I have no idea of what you are referring to with the "gospel message".

 

[Diamond72]

PS-I have no idea of what you are referring to with the "gospel message".

You do not know what it means to be saved? The central message in Christianity?

The Gospel message, central to Christianity, revolves around the life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. It underscores themes of redemption, grace, and eternal life. Key points include:

1. Creation and Fall: God created a perfect world, but humanity fell into sin.
2. Jesus’ Sacrifice: Jesus, God’s son, came to Earth, lived a sinless life, and died to atone for humanity's sins.
3. Resurrection: Jesus rose from the dead, defeating sin and death.
4. Salvation: Through faith in Jesus, believers are granted forgiveness and eternal life.
5. Hope and Renewal: The promise of a renewed creation where believers will live with God.

 

[DennisF]

If you read the passage, he used a stick to find the axe. Of course that is what you would do is poke around with a stick. The miracle was that he found the axe and was able to retrieve it. The hebrew word וַיָּ֖צֶף does not mean float. It means to find or restore. He found the axe head and repaired or restored it. If I loan a tool I want it back in the condition I loaned it. I do not want them to bring back a broken tool for me to repair.

Notice the gospel message? What was lost is now found and not only found but restored. Was this a miracle? Yes. Is God a law breaker? Did He break His own laws? No. He simply redeemed and restored what was lost.

I fully concur with this explanation. (The shadow on the sundial moving backwards is harder to explain, but I believe there is some explanation for it, and some have been advanced.) In the larger scheme of things, this loss of an axe-head seems like a minor event, but the recorder of the incident found it significant enough to include. (It must have a larger message ...)

I understand the definition of a miracle to be an extraordinary event intended to provide evidence for the validity of a message from God conveyed in connection with the event. The appearance of the angels to the shepherds around the birth of Jesus would qualify. Seeing advanced beings in their craft is itself extraordinary and it terrified the shepherds as much as one terrified Daniel by the canal in Babylon or Charles Hall in his 2.5 years of encounters with the Tall Whites in Dreamland (Areas 52 and 53), while a meteorologist out of Nellis (now Creech) Air Force Base within the Nevada Test Site.

 

[DennisF]

No, that's man's addition to His word. In fact, He specifically avoids using the world "world" (tebel).

And since Genesis 1 says they aren't literal 24 hour days, and since Genesis 2 says it happened in 1 "day", we can be sure that addition is not correct.


As you see, evidence and scripture agree; it wasn't literal six days the the entire world was not flooded.

Compelling viewpoint. To add, our English word world comes from were-ald: Were is man (as in werewolf) and ald is old German for age. It means the age of man and is a time not a place. For an insightful exposition on Genesis 1, see Conrad Hyers, The Meaning of Creation:
Amazon.com
Genesis is not, nor could it be, a 20th-century scientific treatise, but it does (as Hyers shows) deny that the creation of Yahweh is a procreation of the gods (Gen. 2:4 - the conclusion) and avoids even using the Hebrew words for sun and moon, using descriptive language instead, because the literal meanings of the Hebrew words are sun-god and moon-god. Hyers provides many more insights that establishes the purpose of the creation account, and it is a rebuttal of paganism. Hyers does not deny the historicity of the Genesis account or mythologize it, but establishes what the biblical author was driving at instead, and it was not to do what Adam was given the dominion to do: science and technology. God does not need special revelation to us to inform us of what he has already empowered us to find out.

 

[DennisF]

2 Kings 5:1 But as one was felling a beam, the axe head fell into the water; and he cried out and said, “Alas, my master! For it was borrowed.” 6 Then the man of God said, “Where did it fall?” And when he showed him the place, he cut off a stick and threw it in there, and made the iron float. 7 He said, “Take it up for yourself.” So he put out his hand and took it.

Elisha just threw the stick in. He didn't go around poking to find the head. The iron floated. Next, I suppose you would like to tell me Israel crossed over the Red Sea in 2 feet of water.

PS-I have no idea of what you are referring to with the "gospel message".

The First Law of Bible study is: Do not trust the translators. It is not that they are sinister but that translation is far more risky and difficult than mere readers of the resulting translations can imagine. A good illustration of this is from the sci-fi movie Stargate involving Egyptology. There is a translation scene that well-illustrates the problem:

This applies to paleo-Hebrew as much as it does to hieratic (cursive) hieroglyphs.
P.S. The archaeologist-hero in the opening of the scene surmises that the writing "may be some form of hieratic or maybe cuneiform". Oops. This doesn't look anything like cuneiform!

 

[DennisF]

Thanks for the videos. I'll have to look at them tonight.

I'm in the process of setting up a meeting with a friend of mine who holds a doctorate in textual criticism and has written various articles on the matter. I will admit the more I try to find out about this, the more confused I get. Unfortunately, my friend has company this week so it may be awhile. However, I did entice him with a free breakfast. He can't resist food.

These videos will help me formulate my thoughts.

Refinement of understanding follows some slightly predictable phases. The first is an awareness of the subject-matter and acquisition of the basic topics where they are initially encountered. The second phase is the expansion of exposure to the wider literature (and people) on the topics, leading to a range of viewpoints - hence some confusion. And thirdly, for those who persist, a search for what lies at the root of the matter, and a simplification and clarification sets in, dispelling confusion. So keep at it; truth is bought with persistence, not borrowed.

 

[The Barbarian]

Hyers provides many more insights that establishes the purpose of the creation account, and it is a rebuttal of paganism. Hyers does not deny the historicity of the Genesis account or mythologize it, but establishes what the biblical author was driving at instead, and it was not to do what Adam was given the dominion to do: science and technology. God does not need special revelation to us to inform us of what he has already empowered us to find out.

Brilliant.

 

[HarleyER]

The First Law of Bible study is: Do not trust the translators. It is not that they are sinister but that translation is far more risky and difficult than mere readers of the resulting translations can imagine. A good illustration of this is from the sci-fi movie Stargate involving Egyptology. There is a translation scene that well-illustrates the problem:

This applies to paleo-Hebrew as much as it does to hieratic (cursive) hieroglyphs.
P.S. The archaeologist-hero in the opening of the scene surmises that the writing "may be some form of hieratic or maybe cuneiform". Oops. This doesn't look anything like cuneiform!

I would say that is correct up to a point. Earlier you used Greek and Hebrew to support your view, just like some others here. The problem is why should I accept these views as well? According to your advice, I shouldn't trust it.

There are many tools one can look at to drive down to the right meaning of the text. Then there is the traditional interpretation which must be weighed and commentaries available. One of my pastors told me that an unorthodox view of a particular text most likely is a heretical view. So one has to look at the sources and make a determination. If people do not believe in the Nicene Creed, this is a indication they hold a heretical view.

I saw in one of the post above that you feel that Elisha just poked around in the stream looking for the ax handle. This is far afield from what the text actually states. It seems apparent from your comments that you really don't believe in miracles despite the Scriptures being filled with them.

 

[Diamond72]

There are many tools one can look at to drive down to the right meaning of the text.

Only Moses and Jesus used plain language. All the other books use mysteries and riddles'. With Moses we can study the meaning of the Hebrew letters that make up the words.

With him will I speak face to face, even apparently, and not in dark speeches; and the similitude of the LORD shall he behold: wherefore then were ye not afraid to speak against my servant Moses? (numbers 12 8)