Was Noah's Flood Global?

The Blog Bible Study
23

The Bible says; “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.” - Genesis 6:17

In Genesis 7:1-6 we read the account of what the LORD said to Noah about entering the ark. Having searched the Authorised (King James) Version (AKJV), the word ‘global’ is not found anywhere in the Bible. This passage clearly states; “And Noah was six hundred years old when the flood of waters was upon the earth.” - Genesis 7:6

Regarding single mention of the ‘planets’ in 2 Kings 23:5, this in relation to burning “incense unto Baal, to the sun, and to the moon, and to the planets, and to all the host of heaven.” The earth is never described as a planet or a globe in the Bible.

What are to make of these worldly discrepancies which are contrary to the Word?

“For God is not the author of confusion, but of peace, as in all churches of the saints.” - 1 Corinthians 14:33

1 Like
24

Welcome to the forum Jeff!

If you are interested in the Noah’s Flood series, I encourage you to read the studies. I don’t have much more to add. I spent at least a year of my life writing 11 chapters that address everything about the flood.

I see you believe in a flat earth. I disagree, but the shape of the earth is not relevant to this discussion.

1 Like
25

A post was split to a new topic: Are the images used on World Events and the Bible website real or Photoshopped?

26

Just a thought.

Mountains are created through tectonic plate movement caused by mantle convection. —Plates crashing into each other. ----Perhaps during the time of Noah, the mountains were not as tall as they are today. We would need to know the topography of Noah’s time.

27

Seems to me there are just a few choices here.

  1. erets means the land in the Noahic passages not the entire earth.
    Or.
  2. the earth was still in the state of pangea and the mountains peaks were of very low altitude.

Since even at 15000 feet ice forms on mountains close to the equator, so mountains anywhere on earth above that level being covered with water
would mean the entire earth would be an icecube or more correctly ice ball.

Also, unless God directly relocated the animals supernaturally, it is nigh on
impossible that 2 sloths for instance could travel across the Atlantic to South
America before perishing, or the koala bear to Australia, and many other species
too numerous to mention which are only indigenous to various parts of the earth
and no fossil record exists to show they ever lived anywhere else.

Then of course you have the dinosaur issue. Personally I believe they became carnivorous after sin entered the first earth age via Satan, which is compatible
with the return of animals co-habitating peacefully in the new earth age to come, Isaiah 11, 65 etc.

Now, if the earth was in a state of pangea prior to the Noahic flood, then we have a whole new ball game.

There are those who believe:
Genesis 10:25 KJV: And unto Eber were born two sons: the name of one was Peleg; for in his days was the earth divided; and his brother’s name was Joktan.

This refers to the division of the continents after the flood.

In this whole discussion, I would like to propose that much of the first several chapters of Genesis are written in a figurative narrative. For instance, the sun, moon, and stars weren’t created until the 4th day, so how could there be evening and morning in the first 3 days?

Part of the issue is many Christians read the Bible in general and the OT in particular
from a western mindset instead of learning how the authors of the ancient near east
communicated.

Many try to read and interpret Genesis and most of the OT like they are reading the
front page of the newspaper, when actually they may be better off reading it as they
would the political caricatures or even the comic section which both relate truth,
but just in a completely different way and with a completely different set of
interpretative structure.

Got to go tend to my sourdough bread, but I’ll revisit this thread. It’s an interesting as
well as important one as it relates to the way we see the biblical metanarrative as a
whole.

1 Like
28

3 posts were split to a new topic: Discussion About Sourdough Bread

29

Welcome to the forum Tamilou!

30

The Hebrew language was comparatively small when looking between it and modern languages such as English. The interpretation of certain words must therefore be based on context. You seem to believe that since biblical writers decided when to use “earth” and “dry land” this gives you full liberty to interpret the words as you see fit, even if it clearly contradicts the rest of the text. You said that my previous post was my opinion and based entirely off of the word “earth”; I’d like to point out that you ended your argument with the exact same logic.

However, even using your interpretation of “dry land” the language of the Bible describes a wide-scale event when referencing erets; either it means the entire earth or all dry land but in either case the result is the same. With regard to you suggesting I believe in pseudo-science and in a “young earth”, I do not. There was a world with waters for God’s Spirit to hover over which occurred before the creation events of genesis so the earth must be an immeasurably larger age than 6,000 or even the generous young earth age of 20,000 years old.

In regard to genetic variation through a couple of individuals, I would suggest some reading of recorded ancient humans’ genomes. They all suggest inbreeding of often extreme levels, but this does not prevent our existence. For a modern reference, you could read about the reduction of elephant seal populations to about 20 in the 19th century and their rebound to over 30,000 in less than 200 years. To further expand on this in regard to animals, the Bible says there was a minimum of two pairs of individuals (unclean, totaling 4) and a maximum of seven pairs (clean, totaling 14) and this does not give a detailed description of which animals were counted as different meaning lions and tigers could very well have been considered different enough for both to be brought onto the ark and generate vast genetic diversity.

Addressing animal dispersion, pointing to a lack of fossil evidence is not a sound argument for disproving animal migration as it is commonly known that fossils are rare, especially on land without volcanic activity. This is why we find little to no fossil evidence of lions in Israel or bisons in America despite knowing they existed in those areas in mass amounts. Furthermore, alligators can survive fairly extreme temperatures by controlling their metabolism so while not ideal it is perfectly possible for them to have migrated. Stating that man is the only thing that can adapt merely because of our tools is a gross oversimplification of nature.

For the survival of fresh water fishes in saltwater or vice versa, this is explained by the differing flows of water based on its temperature and salinity as well as geographical differences in the earth. Cold water tends to sink while warmer water tends to float above, saltier water also tends to sink while lower salt-content waters tend to rise. Cooler water from the Antarctic coast with lower salinity however sinks due to lower temperatures created from its Antarctic origins and runs to this day below a much saltier layer of water as a result of its differences. Because of these effects and several others, there are a plethora of locations on earth today where salt and fresh water occupy the same area but do not mix. The Bible states that waters came from below as well as above and filtration through the ground is how we get freshwater in the first place. It should be noted that most scientists agree that the oceans in the past were not as salty as they are now; the waters that came from below would likely have had even less salt content or been entirely freshwater. This, combined with the varying temperatures of the earth’s regions would have allowed for areas of low and high salinity waters to which fish would have moved to based on their needs or would have been forced to as a result of the force of the waters. Considering earth’s geography, there are numerous areas that would have been subject to calmer waters rather than the intensity of elsewhere in the world, such as Uluru in modern Australia. This location also is noted to have been formed by rocks that would have had to be carried quickly and suddenly existing without the erosion seen in structures formed by rivers while also not being dissolved as other structures are by the same river. This means that a large enough force of water would have had to carry these sedimentary materials and deposit them, as flooding often does and without the erosion present from having been in oceans or rivers. This creates not only an area for fishes to have survived due to the calmness of the waters, but also an area subjected to flooding which was far from Ararat. These cases would not have saved all the world’s fishes, but I do not believe all the world’s fishes were saved to begin with; a vast majority of them likely died along with the land animals from something this catastrophic. No one can know exactly how they survived; we were not there, but the method for them to do so certainly is and knowing the patterns of water make it highly unlikely that all fish would have been killed.

What I have detailed is the simplest and most logical reading of the flood narrative, it hinges on no convoluted evolutionary processes nor on a literarily inconsistent interpretation of the word for earth. The “burden” resides with you as any logical reading of these verses supports a global flood without contradiction from how we understand the world to work.

1 Like
31

I have a couple of questions that I would like to ask regarding this topic. I have changed my thinking entirely on the flood after reading your series. I have tried to explain the thought process behind it, but of course so many immediately think I am teaching things that are unBiblical. What continually comes up are two thoughts. Gen 9:11 regarding the rainbow and God’s promise that “Never again will floodwaters kill all living creatures; never again will a flood destroy the earth” and Gen 9:19 From these three sons of Noah came all the people who now populate the earth. I have read through your series on the flood and I don’t see any thoughts regarding these two topics. I would love to see your thoughts on how to discuss these topics with others. I think your explanations are the most scientific and logical that I can find on the flood.

2 Likes
32

Jovern, welcome and thanks for joining us. Let me try and help, but I’ll use the KJV.

Gen 9:11 And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

The Bible said, the flood ‘destroyed the earth’.

However, that’s not the case at all. The earth was not destroyed, otherwise, Noah and the Ark would not have survived, and we certainly would not be here today. So that brings us back to the word “earth”.

“Earth” is once again the Hebrew word “אֶרֶץ” (erets), which twice as often was translated as “land,” instead of “earth”. God promised Noah, that He would never again send a flood to destroy the animals and land, (see: 7 Important Questions About Noah’s Flood).

Most Christians don’t realize someone translated Hebrew into English for them, or, they expect it to be perfect, and that’s just not the case. Anytime man gets involved in something, you can expect mistakes. This is why I highly recommend the book, “How We Got The Bible,” (Neil Lightfoot) it’s basic, but gets the point across, (see: How We Got The Bible And It’s History).

Moreover, the Bible never said God invented the rainbow in Genesis 9:12. God simply told Noah, the rainbow would be a “token,” which just means a “sign”. It would be a reminder to last for all time. For what it’s worth, I looked at several Bible commentaries I have this morning, not one scholar believed the rainbow came into existence at that time.

Gen 9:19 These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.

Once again, the word “earth” is the Hebrew word “אֶרֶץ” (erets), which twice as often was translated as “land”. Noah’s sons overspread the “land,” creating their own nations as Genesis 10:5 explains.

Jovern, if this subject comes up again in your circles, consider framing your own questions in a respectable way. For example, and as covered in the series.

If God flooded the entire earth, and we all came from Adam, and later Noah:

  • Why are there so many races?
  • Can multiple races come from one single race couple?
  • How did the animals get back to their original environment?

God never said a supernatural act caused all races to come from Adam, and later, Noah.

God never said a supernatural act caused the animals to return to their original environment.

So then, why do they assume those beliefs?

Those assumptions are far worse than just understanding basic Hebrew. :+1:t3:

3 Likes
33

Hi Jovern, I definitely understand your position of wanting to fully comprehend the Bible. Please see my above posts for more information about the flood but the overall conclusion is that the flood did cover the whole earth killing as the Bible says all flesh on it (meaning those not in the ark), and all current humans descend from Noah, his sons and their wives. A quick new piece of information I would call to attention is the promise of the rainbow. This promise, when reduced to a localized area, is quite vague and contradicts what we see today. This promise does not tell us where Noah was when the flooding began and only gives a rough location for where he landed once it subsided. This would not tell us specifically where God would not flood if it where a localized promise. If He meant it for anywhere on earth this would not be a kept promise as we have had floods as recent as hurricane Katrina and more. The only way this reads logically is for it to have been a global flood. I think it’s great to discuss these topics rather than silence people for asking questions, please reply if you’d like to discuss further.

1 Like
34

Jovern, Good mornin, Brandon has explained it wonderfully. I use to come from your perspective as well.

2 Likes
35

'scientists ’ that set out to disprove the flood wound up finding salt water fish and mammal fossils in mountain ranges hundreds of miles from the sea. Several of these scientists stated that the more they studied and explored, the evidence increased that a great flood actually happened at some point in the past. We have to remember that a day to God is as a thousand years and a thousands years is as a day.

1 Like
36

Hey Capt. good luck on the sour dough. I love baking bread. please share some tips on sourdough. No disrespect intended , but I think people spend way too much time over analyzing every scripture. Not sure if the mountains were shorter at the time, Mostly because It it was 7000 God years ago. and I don’t care. the wonders and secrets of the world are far beyond mans comprehension. Mans greatest wisdom is foolishness to God. So I just go with it and not attempt to second guess scripture. I know when I first read the gospel, Jesus words and parables made no sense at all. as I continued reading Mathew over and over I began to realize that he used simple common sense analogies that even the dumbest person [like me] had experienced and could understand. All of them as simple as they are, 'are profound and perfect wisdom. What I began to realize with tears streaming down my face was that he was talking directly to me and that I was beginning to know him.
I was actually walking with him, as if I was there. I get it! The book of James slapped my face and convicted me, and I really needed that. By the time I got to Revelations I was not the same man. I prefer to be guided by faith and my heart
Philippians 4;8 Finally brethren, whatsoever things are true. Whatsoever things are 'honest. Whatsoever things are 'just. Whatsoever things are 'pure. Whatsoever things are lovely. Whatsoever things are of good report. If there be any virtue, and if there be any praise, THINK on these things. Amen

2 Likes
37

Hey Kevin, first of all the flood was approx 4300 years ago & the mountains of today are nearly 30k’ so they would have had to be mere hills to keep the waters from freezing that surmounted them. Also, the elevation of the polar ice caps would have to be much higher than it is today as well as be consistent in it’s altitude.

The fossils found of sea creatures around the world attest to a previous earth age when the waters covered the earth. Gen. 1:2

Philippians 4:8 is one of my favorite verses. I quote if often in my mind when the thoughts of our world seem overwhelming.

2 Timothy 2:15 encourages us to study God’s word. Scholars who devote their lives to study understand that the starting point of interpretation is understanding the original author’s intent as well as how the original audience would naturally have understood the message.

Even the NT at 2000 years ago is still ancient near east culture. Their understanding of the OT should be the way we would presume they understood the NT as it’s writers were educated spiritually by the OT and their ancient near east culture.

Even today when someone of a different culture comes to the USA for instance, many of our figures of speech and “street language” make it difficult for them to understand us even if they have studied English and learn it to one degree or another.

So reading God’s word is great, but as one continues study brings forth much deeper understanding and in fact never ends as God’s word is living.

1 Like
38

4 posts were split to a new topic: If people have to know all of that to be saved, well, you are gonna be lonely in heaven

39

Mount Everest was created because of the catastrophe of the flood and what happened to the earth. We need to stop looking at the flood as a bath tub filling up with water. This argument of yours doesn’t work.

1 Like
41

Are you saying Dinosaurs etc became extinct/died out before the “creation week”?

1 Like
42

I’m saying the dinosaurs became extinct when the earth “became” void, (tohu) Gen. 1:2 Or at least that’s what makes the most sense. Many scholars now agree that Gen 1:2 should be translated Became void, not was void.

Also, I believe the creation story his extremely allegorical. Adam & Eve didn’t eat literal fruit from a literal tree anymore than it was a literal talking snake that deceived them. Not to mention Eve was already deceived when she “saw it was good for food and to make one wise” etc.

1 Like
43

3 posts were split to a new topic: Creation week: Dinosaurs and man didn’t walk together?