Flood - worldwide or local?
- Thread starter Locutus
- Start date
-
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.
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.
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.
Question:
Why would God have Noah spend 120 years building a huge boat when, in a year, he and his family could simply have hiked out of the region with some supplies and camped out until the flood was over? This view makes nonsense of the story.
Answer:
Rather than presenting a problem for a local flood view, this question exposes how young-earth creationism’s plain literal priority in reading the account entirely misses the biblical emphasis of the account. God planned the events to picture judgment and salvation. There is a spiritual dimension to the story, because the ark is a picture of Christ. What young-earth creationists often miss in their zeal to defend a plain-literal reading of the story of Noah’s ark is that it is not about the geological history of planet Earth. It is about the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is made plain by how Peter uses the flood event in 1 Peter 3:21-22.
In God’s plan it was important that Noah enter the ark as an “incarnation” of the gospel; Noah rested in Jesus Christ for salvation. Noah was figuratively “in Christ” while he was “in the ark.” God has a plan whenever he gives his servant a mission, whether it is Noah, Abraham, Ezekiel, or Hosea. Any speculation that wanders from the redemptive purposes of God has lost touch with the biblical emphasis. Once we understand the redemptive purpose God has revealed, the answer to this question is clear. To tell Noah to hike over there where he would be safe from God’s judgment is to teach that man must get up and save himself by his own two feet. Christians should focus on the example of faithful obedience Noah sets rather than speculate on how God would have acted if the flood had been a localized event.
Full text:
Beyond Creation Science Flood Questions 1
Why would God have Noah spend 120 years building a huge boat when, in a year, he and his family could simply have hiked out of the region with some supplies and camped out until the flood was over? This view makes nonsense of the story.
Answer:
Rather than presenting a problem for a local flood view, this question exposes how young-earth creationism’s plain literal priority in reading the account entirely misses the biblical emphasis of the account. God planned the events to picture judgment and salvation. There is a spiritual dimension to the story, because the ark is a picture of Christ. What young-earth creationists often miss in their zeal to defend a plain-literal reading of the story of Noah’s ark is that it is not about the geological history of planet Earth. It is about the gospel of Jesus Christ. This is made plain by how Peter uses the flood event in 1 Peter 3:21-22.
In God’s plan it was important that Noah enter the ark as an “incarnation” of the gospel; Noah rested in Jesus Christ for salvation. Noah was figuratively “in Christ” while he was “in the ark.” God has a plan whenever he gives his servant a mission, whether it is Noah, Abraham, Ezekiel, or Hosea. Any speculation that wanders from the redemptive purposes of God has lost touch with the biblical emphasis. Once we understand the redemptive purpose God has revealed, the answer to this question is clear. To tell Noah to hike over there where he would be safe from God’s judgment is to teach that man must get up and save himself by his own two feet. Christians should focus on the example of faithful obedience Noah sets rather than speculate on how God would have acted if the flood had been a localized event.
Full text:
Beyond Creation Science Flood Questions 1
