Flood - worldwide or local?

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
W

wsblind

Guest
#421
#421
valiant said:
the highest mountain known to Noah. The flood was vast (where mankind had reached) but not necessarily worldwide as we know it today.

We can stand in many places and see no mountains at all.
Click to expand...
How do you know what was known to Noah? How do you know what Noah's boundaries were?

Did I miss your answer on this? I asked it earlier.
 
V

valiant

Senior Member
#422
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#422
dcontroversal said:
You do understand the whole order of things right and Peter's version of the world that was PERISHED and the world that NOW IS.....

your right bro...enough said...no sense in me arguing with a fence post ;)
Click to expand...
Peter's view of the world was like Noah's, limited. He had no more idea than Noah of the world as we know it. He simply used Bible language.
 
V

valiant

Senior Member
#423
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#423
wsblind said:
How do you know what was known to Noah? How do you know what Noah's boundaries were?

Did I miss your answer on this? I asked it earlier.
Click to expand...
I use my common sense in knowing that his knowledge was limited.
 
dcontroversal

dcontroversal

Banned
#424
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#424
valiant said:
Peter's view of the world was like Noah's, limited. He had no more idea than Noah of the world as we know it. He simply used Bible language.
Click to expand...
I don't think so pal....these men were inspired by GOD to write what was written....their view of the world had NO bearing on what was written....and to think otherwise is absurd
 
W

wsblind

Guest
#426
#426
valiant said:
I use my common sense in knowing that his knowledge was limited.
Click to expand...
My common sense tells me that we WAAAYYYYYYYY underestimate the knowledge they had.

We get a sense of it with the tower of babel. Just look how quick the tower of babel came along after the flood. And mankind was living in"the day's before Babel" for generations and generations and living for 100's of years.

I believe the majority of them would make any of us today...look like morons.
 
V

valiant

Senior Member
#427
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#427
dcontroversal said:
I don't think so pal....these men were inspired by GOD to write what was written....their view of the world had NO bearing on what was written....and to think otherwise is absurd
Click to expand...
when they used eretz they used it as they understood it. they had no other way
 
Locutus

Locutus

Senior Member
#428
Feb 10, 2017
5,928
685
113
#428
I think Peter's statement is quite informative:


2 Pe 2:5 and the old world did not spare, but the eighth person, Noah, of righteousness a preacher, did keep, a flood on the world of the impious having brought,
 
V

valiant

Senior Member
#429
Mar 22, 2015
8,025
124
63
#429
wsblind said:
My common sense tells me that we WAAAYYYYYYYY underestimate the knowledge they had.

We get a sense of it with the tower of babel. Just look how quick the tower of babel came along after the flood. And mankind was living in"the day's before Babel" for generations and generations and living for 100's of years.

I believe the majority of them would make any of us today...look like morons.
Click to expand...
well if you think they knew and spoke of the world as we know it I pity you :)

it suggests your name is right LOL
 
W

wsblind

Guest
#430
#430
valiant said:
well if you think they knew and spoke of the world as we know it I pity you :)

it suggests your name is right LOL
Click to expand...
Well if you think Noah was in diapers and sucking his thumb.......I don't pity ya,I just disagree.:cool:
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#431
Jun 30, 2015
24,788
13,418
113
#431
valiant said:
when they used eretz they used it as they understood it. they had no other way
Click to expand...
Even if this point is true, it does not preclude a global flood. To say that they used 'eretz' to mean the entire known world, and then turn around and claim that the flood only covered their "known world" is circular reasoning and equivocation.

If they didn't know about the world "beyond", how could they reasonably know whether or not it was flooded?
 
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#433
Jun 30, 2015
24,788
13,418
113
#433
valiant said:
Precisely. Or even think about it
Click to expand...
That was a non-answer. You are claiming that the word "eretz" means "the known world". Then you claim that because "eretz" means "the known world" that the flood, which covered the "eretz", only covered the known world.

This is circular reasoning. There is nothing in the narrative which limits the flood to "the known world". If Noah did not have a word for the world beyond what he "knew" then how could he have used such a word?

Again, there is nothing about "eretz" which limits the flood to being local. If it means "to the extent of the known world" then it is certainly possibly that it exceeds the known world. The problem here is logical, not lexical.
 
dcontroversal

dcontroversal

Banned
#434
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#434
valiant said:
when they used eretz they used it as they understood it. they had no other way
Click to expand...
You know...I agree with many things you say...but this view you hold not only denies, but rejects the fact that GOD INSPIRED EVERY WORD WRITTEN and your view is erroneous bro...
 
PennEd

PennEd

Senior Member
#435
Apr 22, 2013
12,999
8,698
113
#435
valiant said:
it is quite obvious that Genesis was written by different hands due to style and content, to say nothing of the covenants around which it was written. For example chapter 14 is totally different from the rest of Genesis, and calls Abram 'the Hebrew', suggesting it was compiled by a foreigner ('the Hebrew' was a foreigners way of seeing the people of God). It dates itself by foreign rulers.

We have to ask, 'why was Genesis written around covenants'? And the answer is because they were the main reason for very early writings. Why was Isaac written about so little? Because he had few covenants.

Furthermore the phrase 'these are the family histories of --' were typical of a colophon added to a tablet to show what it was about or who wrote it.

In those days the fact that Moses took earlier tablets and incorporated them into his text would have been quite normal.
Click to expand...
Besides YOUR common Sense, where are you getting this from? You don't believe Moses wrote all of Genesis?

Why can't we just believe God? Why do we have to depend on YOUR common sense? I don't get it.
 
W

wsblind

Guest
#436
#436
Dino246 said:
That was a non-answer. You are claiming that the word "eretz" means "the known world". Then you claim that because "eretz" means "the known world" that the flood, which covered the "eretz", only covered the known world.

This is circular reasoning. There is nothing in the narrative which limits the flood to "the known world". If Noah did not have a word for the world beyond what he "knew" then how could he have used such a word?

Again, there is nothing about "eretz" which limits the flood to being local. If it means "to the extent of the known world" then it is certainly possibly that it exceeds the known world. The problem here is logical, not lexical.
Click to expand...
Wow, I really am an idiot. A content idiot though.:cool:

Edit~~makes total sense to me, I just had to study an hour to comprehend it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Dino246

Dino246

Senior Member
#437
Jun 30, 2015
24,788
13,418
113
#437
wsblind said:
Wow, I really am an idiot. A content idiot though.:cool:

Edit~~makes total sense to me, I just had to study an hour to comprehend it.
Click to expand...
I'm certain you're no idiot. I suspect that if I hadn't written it, I'd need to take time to get my head around it too. The reading I've done in the last couple of years on logical arguments and fallacies has really benefited my critical thinking ability. :)
 
trofimus

trofimus

Senior Member
#438
Aug 17, 2015
10,684
794
113
#438
Dino246 said:
This is circular reasoning. There is nothing in the narrative which limits the flood to "the known world".
Click to expand...
There are some verses that make it clear that it is not about the whole planet.

For example:

"By the twenty-seventh day of the second month the earth was completely dry." (Genesis 8:14, NIV)

Earth is a wrong word here. Land known to Noah was completely dry.

Planet completely dry = death for all living immediately. World oceans must stay for life to be possible.

From such places like this it is quite certain that the word "eretz" means local land, not the whole planet.
 
B

buddyt

Banned
#439
Aug 25, 2016
236
1
0
#439
hornetguy

Your right it doesn't say flesh. I could argue about the number 8 and other things. But I rather keep it civil. Perhaps you can tell me where the other Races came from and how from one family we have all of them. My belief is they came from the 6th day of creation when God created Man.
 
dcontroversal

dcontroversal

Banned
#440
Dec 12, 2013
46,515
20,395
113
#440
Thought of another point today......if the flood was local and not global what is the point of the rainbow which is seen worldwide?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.