• Welcome to Christian Forums
  1. Welcome to Christian Forums, a forum to discuss Christianity in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

  2. The forums in the Christian Congregations category are now open only to Christian members. Please review our current Faith Groups list for information on which faith groups are considered to be Christian faiths. Christian members please remember to read the Statement of Purpose threads for each forum within Christian Congregations before posting in the forum.

Noah's local flood

Discussion in 'Creation & Evolution' started by Honeycomb, Apr 29, 2002.

  1. Honeycomb

    Honeycomb Member

    103
    +0
    Protestant
    The whole eretz land was flooded. :pink:

    quote:
    ____________________

    Genesis 7:21-23

    [21] And all flesh died that moved upon the earth, both of fowl, and of cattle, and of beast, and of every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth, and every man:

    [22] All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land, died.

    [23] And every living substance was destroyed which was upon the face of the ground, both man, and cattle, and the creeping things, and the fowl of the heaven; and they were destroyed from the earth: and Noah only remained alive, and they that were with him in the ark.
    ____________________

    Most are shocked at the suggestion that the flood wasn't worldwide, but it wouldn't have been necessary in order to destroy the giants and the perversion they had caused in the region where the Adamites were located.

    Go back and re-read the entire account translating "earth" as eretz: meaning, land or country.

    If you still subscribe to the universality of the Flood, you have a lot of explaining to do.

    Here's a small sample of what I’m talking about :idea:

    There is not enough moisture and water available to cover all the mountains by fifteen cubits (Gen. 7:20) given that some of the mountains are 6 miles high.

    That means that Egypt and all the land would have been covered with six miles of water.

    The desert mummies in Egypt and buildings and monuments show no sign of extensive water damage from that time period or ever for that matter, except the sphinx.

    Before & After. :scratch:

    The Geologist says the sphinx shows water damage to at least 10,000 years ago, some say much older. This much older date for the sphinx is contested by the archeological establishment though.

    The archeologist puts the sphinx at 4500 hundred years old, well after the last ice age, and around the time when the local=(eretz) flood of Noah’s day occurred, which was right in the middle of what is commonly referred to the Bronze Age in human development.

    The Sphinx must be on the order of 7,000 to 10,000 years old to have the marks, scars of water erosion found on it though.

    The Sphinx, when considered with the neighboring pyramids and ancient writings, is part of, and possibly the first element of, a kind of astronomical map related to the constellation Orion.

    They have concluded that the "best fit" for this map is found for the position of the stars as they were in 10,500 B.C.E.

    There are references that the Sphinx existed prior to the pyramids though.

    And also, there is an uninterrupted succession of dynasties, ruling & reining in Egypt, going right through the time of what is commonly referred to as Noah’s flood, in 2500 BC.

    Even if we were to put the eretz flood of Noah to a much earlier date. That date would be have to be around 15 Million years ago.

    Earth's geologic record shows the Sea level continued to oscillate through Tertiary time until about mid-Miocene time (~15 million years ago) when the last great high-stand in sea level occurred.

    I can go on and on talking about Earth History. :rolleyes:

    Noah’s flood at first, should be established within a more in-depth foundation of reality and documentation.

    Eretz=local land.

    The whole Eretz was flooded, underwater.

    Just remember, when reading those passages on Noah’s flood, to fix the original Hebrew word into your mind.

    That word is--> [Eretz]=Local Land, and you’ll be doing just fine


    Have a great day. :wave:
    Peace & God bless
     
    We teamed up with Faith Counseling. Can they help you today?
  2. rage

    rage New Member

    65
    +0
    Now, I am an atheist, so I don't subscribe to the flood, but if you are correct, please explain why Noah took every living creature on board the ark, if it was just for the local land? (notice, it doesn't say, "2 of every living creature on the "eretz" or earth," but rather, "2 of every living thing"). Why didn't god just have noah gather up all the living creatures and have them journey to other "eretz"?
    Of course, your conclusions on what the bible meant on which areas were flooded and, if there were indeed a flood :rolleyes:, that it didn't kill anyone outside that "eretz", were incorrect if you look at the following verses. Specifically read the one that says "and all mankind." Of course, you might say that it refers to every living thing on the "eretz" as stated earlier, but if you look up a little farther, it says "all the high mountains under the heavens were covered" - note that the sentence does not say of just one specific area, but everything under the entire heavens!!!. Then, if you look below where it refers to "all mankind," you will see where it says that every living thing on dry land was wiped out. Again, it doesn't refer to one specific area, but any land that was dry (ie...anything that isn't ocean!)

    That doesn't even begin to go into the absurdness that only one area flooding will cover an entire mountain by at least 20 feet!

    good in thought....but...either the bible is contradicting itself (again!) or you are wrong, and your attempt to try and rationalize something that has already been shown unreasonable, has failed.
     
  3. TScott

    TScott Curmudgeon

    +145
    Non-Denom
    US-Democrat
    Actually, the story of the flood in Genesis is a recounting of another story found in the epic poem, The Gilgamesh. The Gilgamesh is a Babylonian epic that was written nearly 2000 years before Genesis. There is a great deal of similarity between The Gilgamesh and what is found in Genesis, not surprising when one considers that they are all of the same people. Here is an excerpt from the Gilgamesh, the hero of this segment of the epic, Utamipishtim, has been told by the god Ea of an impending flood of the local river, and has been given instructions on how to build and outfit a boat to survive the flood. After the river floods there is no land in sight, but Utamipishtim knows the flood is ebbing because his boat is grounded:

    So on the seventh day I let loose a single dove,
    Which flew around but could not land so returned to me.
    So on the seventh day I let loose a single swallow,
    Which flew around but could not land so returned to me.
    So on the seventh day I let loose a single raven,
    Which flew around and found a place to land so it returned not to me.


    See the similarity?
     
  4. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    The epic of gilgamesh was just one of many accounts of floods. does this not indicate to you that the flood was worldwide ? Or is it just coincidence that most societies have Nov 1 as the day of the dead ? PS the Bible does not contradict itself.
     
  5. TScott

    TScott Curmudgeon

    +145
    Non-Denom
    US-Democrat
    No, but it certainly would tell me that at a time about 5 or 6 thousand years ago there must have been a heck of a flood in Mesopotamia which was probably where the people in the Noah story lived. I believe recent archeological and geological findings support this.
     
  6. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    Recent archaeological evidence, such as ?

    (didnt think I would call you on it, did you ?)
     
  7. TScott

    TScott Curmudgeon

    +145
    Non-Denom
    US-Democrat
    I haven't read it, but I believe Robert Ballard and the National Geographic have recently found evidence of a massive flood in the area of the Black Sea about 5,000 years ago, and no, I don't post anything hoping that I won't get called on it. Why would you make that assumption?
     
  8. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    No offense meant, although you obviously took it. I was just being facetious. But still, your reply was awfully vague. As I am not in a place right this moment where I would have my references handy, I can make more intelligent posts tomorrow (hopefully). But in the meantime I will leave you with my apology at offending you and just say that the Bible says there was a worldwide flood and I believe it. I am going to look up the word "eretz" in my Strongs and see if that initial post was accurate.
     
  9. TScott

    TScott Curmudgeon

    +145
    Non-Denom
    US-Democrat
  10. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    My arent we rude today ! I noted that you ignored my apology and got my name wrong too. I guess I misjudged you TSnot and I will talk to you tomorrow when I am better armed.
     
  11. TScott

    TScott Curmudgeon

    +145
    Non-Denom
    US-Democrat
    What???!!! I'm sorry I got your name wrong. I also didn't comment on your apology because it wasn't needed, since I wasn'rt offended at all.

    Please tell me how you think I am rude for finding the Ballard article?
     
  12. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    If you will read my reply again, I didnt say you were rude for finding an article. I said you were rude for ignoring my apology, which if there was none needed, you should have said so. You came off sounding terse, but I was probably being too sensitive, so once again I apologize. Between today and tomorrow I will try to get a chance to look at that link and look over some material I have at home. Looking forward to talking to you again.
     
  13. cheezit

    cheezit Saved in 1976

    196
    +0
    Baptist
    Alright now kids.. :) ;) :D

    Ahem.

    First of all, I think that we need to define the phrase "worldwide". In the year 2002, we know that the Earth is round and it has many, many bodies of land, all of which have many, many people. But, in the time of Noah, they didn't know how big the Earth was, nor did they know much about other people that didn't live near them, assuming that there were a lot of people on the other side of the earth. It is entirely possible that the "worldwide" flood of Noah only took place on the entire world, as they knew it. It is also entirely possible that it did, in fact, cover the entire earth as we know it now.

    I can only go by what the Bible tells me. Because I wasn't there when it happened, I have no first hand knowledge. And neither does anyone else. As a born again Christian, I believe that every word in the Bible is true. I will say that I clicked on the link for National Geographic but I have not read it yet. I am, however, a little dubious of anything that starts out by calling a Bible account of anything a "legend". I will, though, in all fairness check out the site.
     
  14. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    It doesnt matter what "they" knew. Remember, it was the Holy Spirit who wrote the Bible. I haven't read it yet either, but I will try to get to it before tomorrow.
     
  15. rage

    rage New Member

    65
    +0
    tsk tsk tsk.

    why would one myth based on another give proof of a worldwide flood again? If they were written at the same time, different locations, yes, but if one was written previous to the other and the second shows many similarites to the first (as in the bird), than that offers no proof of a world wide flood.

    Oh, and P.S. - it does contradict itself - please, do your best to explain away all of the contradictions listed here (some can be, some are a bit tougher):
    http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/donald_morgan/inconsistencies.html
    or go here:
    http://www.infidels.org/library/modern/theism/christianity/errancy.html
    for a whole section on biblical errancy. Dont say there isn't when it can be shown otherwise. You can have fun with this for the moment:
    GE 10:5, 20, 31 There were many languages before the Tower of Babel.
    GE 11:1 There was only one language before the Tower of Babel.

    ok..back to topic...

    Care to give ANY archaeological evidence for the flood? Remember, the flood had to cover the earth with water twenty plus feet above the highest mountains. This would require steady, worldwide rainfall at the rate of about 6 inches per minute, 360 inches per hour, 8640 inches per day--for 40 days and nights--so as to cover the entire earth with an endless ocean 5 miles deep, thus burying 29,000 ft. Mt. Everest under 22 ft. of water. How did the author know the depth of the water? Did Noah take soundings? And where has all this water gone?

    Heh...amazing. That you can believe something though facts and probability indicate otherwise is amazing to me. That you wont even question this is crazy. WHY? You say you want to know truth, but yet you do your best to hide the truth, twist the truth, and avoid the truth.
    In reading that initial post, take my first response in also, and just THINK about it. THINK for yourself.
     
  16. rage

    rage New Member

    65
    +0
    Ok, read over what is required in my post above for a worldwide flood. Now, if it was NOT worldwide, the bible still says it had to cover a mountain. That would require that the mountain be in some sort of basin that was close to equal in depth as the mountain's that they knew of were high. As soon as you find a place over in the middle east like that..you let me know.

    Also, read over the links I posted. If you believe that every word in the bible is true, then surely you can explain most, if not all of those contradictions.

    Yes, the holy spirit guided the hands that wrote the bible..so much so that they couldn't even get their own thoughts in on say...women. And of course, the monks that copied the bible over and over and over to preserve it NEVER made any changes....rriiiigggghhhttt :rolleyes:

    If that is the case the general prejudice and oppression that the bible holds against women is from the holy spirit, correct?
     
  17. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    As promised, I did a little research into the word erets, which is the world most commonly used in the early part of Genesis to describe the earth. There is another word used in the early part of Genesis which means basically the ground. According to Strongs, erets means "from an unused root prob. meaning to be firm; the earth (at large , or partitively, a land).

    Since the original post in this thread chose to take textual evidence from the book of Genesis, I will do the same to submit the following:

    Gen 6:6 (reason for the flood) "It grieved God that He had made man" Do you think this means only the men in Mesopotamia ? Or would it be the entire world ?

    Gen 6:7 "I will destroy man from the face of the earth ".
    When someone says to you the phrase "from the face of the earth" what do you think it means ? (be honest)

    Gen 7:19. "the high hills that were under the whole heaven "
    What part of the earth does this exclude ?

    Gen 7:22. "All in whose nostrils was the breath of life, of all that was in the dry land died" Were there people living outside of Mesopotamia at the time ?

    So please stop pretending the Bible talks about a local flood when it doesn't. If you don't believe it, just say so. But don't twist the scriptures to fit you.

    As for the pyramids and sphynx that you mentioned, according to both Hebrew and Greek Bible chronology, the flood predates the 1st Egyptian dynasty.

    In the brief time I have left I will try to touch upon the subject of archaeology and the flood:

    1. The late Dr Herbert (? can't read my own notes!) Nilsson describes his finds at the lignite beds in Giesenthal Germany as follows: "...there is a complete mixture of plants and insects from all climatic zones and all recognized regions of the geography of plants or animals...the incrustation must have been very rapid ."

    2. Space would not permit me to list all the other finds of such things as deep sea fossils in mountainous regions.

    As for the Bible, I will only be happy to take up the challenge and post results one by one on a separate thread.

    Respectfully submitted
     
  18. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    Rage;
    Looked at your alleged inconsistency link. Most of them are laughable. Some require more study. If I take the time and energy to answer every single one, will you believe the Bible ?
     
  19. Honeycomb

    Honeycomb Member

    103
    +0
    Protestant
    Hi :) God bless. I have done written a Genesis rewrite so people can understand what I’m trying to say here.

    Seems like most people cannot think about the flood text without their “global” glasses on

    I have decided to rewrite Genesis to help those that want to know what was originally written. The true intent of the passages by the original writers.

    Remember :) Think local.

    “Eretz” is the word that is in the original manuscripts. Wherever we see the word Earth in the account of Noah’s flood, it's Eretz and it means local region or land.

    This is fun. :)

    Lets try it.
    ____________________

    Gen 6:11-12. The local land also was corrupt before God, and the region was filled with violence. {12} And God looked upon the countryside, and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon the territory.

    Gen 6:13 And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the province is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the terrain.

    Gen 6:17 And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the province, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the region shall die.
    ____________________

    Do you see it yet?

    Wasn’t that something! :)

    The above account is more accurate than most I see printed.

    Always use concordance when studying God’s word.


    Have a great day :wave:
    Peace & God bless
     
  20. hopeofglory10

    hopeofglory10 New Member

    32
    +0
    No, eretz (sic) does not mean local area in the flood account. It means the earth. The concordance I used is called Strongs. You may have heard of it. Have you ever heard of reading in context before ????
     
Loading...