Where are the current ripples from Noah's Flood?

[dlamberth]

What drainage? During rain?

After the rain stopped.

 

[Astrid]

After the rain stopped.

In the story theres a wind wafts it away.

 

[common prophets]

I mean, the Bible does describe a global flood since God talks about covering all the Earth in water: Genesis 6:17 -
- NIV - I am going to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy all life under the heavens, every creature that has the breath of life in it. Everything on earth will perish.
- KJV - And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; and every thing that is in the earth shall die.
- ASV - And I, behold, I do bring the flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein is the breath of life, from under heaven; everything that is in the earth shall die.

So they're not misreading it. It's just that context isn't applied.

'erets <0776>​

Ura 'erets​

Pronunciation:	eh'-rets
Origin:	from an unused root probably meaning to be firm

 

[common prophets]

'erets <0776>​

Ura 'erets​

Pronunciation:	eh'-rets
Origin:	from an unused root probably meaning to be firm

God first told of his intention to bring a Flood: “I am about to bring floodwaters on the land to destroy from under the visible sky the living creatures that have the breath of life in them. Everything that is in the land will die” (Bible, Genesis 6:17). The conventional translation of this verse reads “I am about to bring floodwaters on the earth to destroy from under the sky all the living creatures that have the breath of life in them. Everything that is on the earth will die.” The Hebrew word for “earth” is “erets.” It also means “land” (Strong’s 0776). The Hebrew word for “sky” is “shamayim.” It also means “visible sky” (Strong’s 08064). The Hebrew word for “living creatures” is “basar.” It only means, “living creatures” (Strong’s 01320). There is no “all” in the Hebrew text.)

 

[David Lamb]

The Hebrew word for “living creatures” is “basar.” It only means, “living creatures” (Strong’s 01320). There is no “all” in the Hebrew text.)

No, but there is a word for "everything":

“"And behold, I Myself am bringing floodwaters on the earth, to destroy from under heaven all flesh in which [is] the breath of life; everything that [is] on the earth shall die.” (Ge 6:17 NKJV)

 

[common prophets]

Of what use is the Bible if you need
science to tell you what the facts are?

If we read the Bible with science, theology backed by science is even stronger than theology without science.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

'erets <0776>​

Ura 'erets​

Pronunciation:	eh'-rets
Origin:	from an unused root probably meaning to be firm

Yes, but not many people know, nor care, about the original Hebrew. They see the English text as it and take it at face value.

Heck, there's a guy on here who says the Bible was originally written in Jacobean English and that the Hebrew came after. That's the sort of people you're working with.

 

[David Lamb]

Yes, but not many people know, nor care, about the original Hebrew. They see the English text as it and take it at face value.

Heck, there's a guy on here who says the Bible was originally written in Jacobean English and that the Hebrew came after. That's the sort of people you're working with.

What about the original Hebrew for the verse that says that only Noah and those people and animals with him on the ark remained alive?:

“So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who [were] with him in the ark remained [alive].” (Ge 7:23 NKJV)

Incidentally, I'm certainly not the "guy on here who says the Bible was originally written in Jacobean English and that the Hebrew came after"!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

What about the original Hebrew for the verse that says that only Noah and those people and animals with him on the ark remained alive?:

“So He destroyed all living things which were on the face of the ground: both man and cattle, creeping thing and bird of the air. They were destroyed from the earth. Only Noah and those who [were] with him in the ark remained [alive].” (Ge 7:23 NKJV)

Incidentally, I'm certainly not the "guy on here who says the Bible was originally written in Jacobean English and that the Hebrew came after"!

When you only live and know about a certain portion of the world, then everything in it is everything in the world.

 

[David Lamb]

When you only live and know about a certain portion of the world, then everything in it is everything in the world.

I don't want to make false assumptions, but it sounds as though you don't believe that God inspired the bible writers to write what was true.

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

I don't want to make false assumptions, but it sounds as though you don't believe that God inspired the bible writers to write what was true.

I do not believe in the idea that God caused a global flood since there's not a shred of evidence for God doing such a thing and the original Biblical Hebrew, along with the knowledge of humans and humanity, show that not to be the case.

 

[David Lamb]

I do not believe in the idea that God caused a global flood since there's not a shred of evidence for God doing such a thing and the original Biblical Hebrew, along with the knowledge of humans and humanity, show that not to be the case.

My point was that you seemed to be giving the OT writers' limited knowledge of the whole earth as a reason for us not believing that the Flood covered the whole earth.

 

[Larniavc]

The flood story is exactly what makes genesis a non credible sourc.
And
It says a whole lot more and more specific than just your short paraphrase.

It’s not impossible that Earth was a water world about 3 billion years ago; it would not be inconsistent with the evidence. But more recently would be impossible.

 

[Larniavc]

Generation by generation for over 60,000,000 years?
Shirley you’re joking!

He’s not joking. And stop calling him Shirley.

 

[Larniavc]

and I do not see that system as being sufficient to generate humans.

What is your evidence for this assertion?

 

[Astrid]

If we read the Bible with science, theology backed by science is even stronger than theology without science.Kamala Zharris, i

If we read the Bible with science, theology backed by science is even stronger than theology without science.

This is about “flood”.

If it’s read with all new words, sure, then it’s accurate
Any story can be made true that way.


Of what use is a story like that?

what if anything does all your “ science and theology”
lead you to think really happened.

 

[KevinT]

What is your evidence for this assertion?

The same evidence as when I see a hammer and assert that it is not sufficient to generate a microchip.

It is not my theory that human life came from abiogenesis, therefore the burden of proof is not on my shoulders.

KT

 

[Larniavc]

The same evidence as when I see a hammer and assert that it is not sufficient to generate a microchip.

That’s not evidence though. That’s a random statement that is inapplicable to this subject. To clarify: what is the hammer in your scenario?

 

[Astrid]

The same evidence as when I see a hammer and assert that it is not sufficient to generate a microchip.

It is not my theory that human life came from abiogenesis, therefore the burden of proof is not on my shoulders.

KT

Do you know any advanced biochemistry / organic chemistry?

Do you knows there are non living molecules that cannot
possibly be made except by living things?


Do you know how to exactly identify the boundary between
life, and non- life?

Unless you have a Yes to each of those your
view is clearly one of ignorance multiplied by
religious ideology.

 

[AV1611VET]

Do you know how to exactly identify the boundary between life, and non- life?

Telomeres?

Unless you have a Yes to each of those your view is clearly one of ignorance multiplied by religious ideology.

We're all ignorant in our own way, aren't we?