T
Beliefs Regarding The Flood
- Thread starter Budman
- 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.
The whole earth (kol erets) of that time was limited to Mesopotamia, as indicated by the place names that are mentioned in Genesis before the flood.
Contrasted to after the flood, we have place names extending beyond Mesopotamia.
Thus, there would be no need to flood the entire planet if mankind was concentrated in one local.
This is proven-out even in the NT...
For this is hidden from them by their willing it so, that heavens were of old, and earth by water, and through water, having subsisted by the Word of God, through which the world which then was, being flooded by water, perished. (2 Peter 3.5-6)
G
Gr8grace
Guest
K
KennethC
Guest
Verse 5 is speaking of when the world was formed, and verse 6 is about Noah's flood.
Then Peter shows that the second time the world of ungodly men will be destroyed by fire instead of water, because God promised He would not flood the earth again.
T
Tintin
Guest
Was there a massive 'local' Flood in the ancient Near East long after the Great Flood? It's very likely. But another worldwide Flood? No.
G
Gr8grace
Guest
T
Tintin
Guest
Yes, but there was no life at that point and the waters were already there. So it's not a worldwide Flood. Maybe a cosmic storm would be more appropriate.
Again Peter settles it.
For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
(2Pe 3:5-7)
Peter is comparing the first catastrophe by water with the 2nd by fire.
If the flood is local then the destruction to come will be local.
But the normal reading would have them both worldwide.
But then again there's not much normal around here
For they deliberately overlook this fact, that the heavens existed long ago, and the earth was formed out of water and through water by the word of God, and that by means of these the world that then existed was deluged with water and perished. But by the same word the heavens and earth that now exist are stored up for fire, being kept until the day of judgment and destruction of the ungodly.
(2Pe 3:5-7)
Peter is comparing the first catastrophe by water with the 2nd by fire.
If the flood is local then the destruction to come will be local.
But the normal reading would have them both worldwide.
But then again there's not much normal around here
G
Gr8grace
Guest
P
purgedconscience
Guest
There are global flood deniers who will simply argue that movement in the earth's tectonic plates caused mountains to be formed and that a flood isn't even necessary. In other words, the sea life just rose with the mountains as they were being formed.
Like I said, I believe in a worldwide flood. I'm just seeking to point out that we don't need to find any more water. We already have enough if the mountains are lowered to their original levels before the flood. Read Genesis carefully. God said that He was going to destroy the earth. There were all sorts of things happening besides just some rain.
Genesis chapter 6 verse 13
And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth.
The heavens and earth of today are far different than the original heavens and earth were pre-flood.
Last edited:
P
purgedconscience
Guest
I apologize to anybody who read my last post before I edited it. I don't know where my mind was and I typed in some things that I didn't mean to say and that didn't make sense.
T
Tintin
Guest
I don't know, ask God. The Bible records the beginning of everything to the end of all things (in a sense). There was no Luciferian Flood or anything in Genesis 1. Please let's stick to reading the Bible in a historical-grammatical manner.
J
jaybird88
Guest
no flood??? lol i get what u r saying.
the 10500 date is shared by many ancient cultures around the world. they dont all say it was a flood, but all agree it was a date of significant importance. what are your thoughts on it?
G
Gr8grace
Guest
I did ask God and He told me! Just kidding! For me, it was a long journey and lots of study to come to my conclusion. So I realize that a couple of posts can't explain that.
I will just leave it be. And thanks for your perspective.
T
Tintin
Guest
That's the Black Sea Flood, yes? If so, it happened roughly around the time of Moses. My thoughts are that much of the known-world or let's just say, the Cradle of Civilization, was very populated at the time (even more so than later) and that throughout history, many groups left that part of the world and went their separate ways with their stories and their cultures (like the dispersal at the Tower of Babel, but this would have been a common occurrence). The Black Sea Flood must have been a rather significant event, but it may also have been conflated with stories of the true worldwide Flood much earlier in human history. Ancient cultures were known for piecing together their histories and filling in the gaps. So I believe some of those Flood stories, but not all, are stories of the Great Flood itself.
Last edited by a moderator:
J
jaybird88
Guest
your right that some of these people when they mention the flood, they refer to it as in the time of their ancestors who came from another land. common in the Americas who believed their ancestors came from across the sea in the direction of Europe and Africa.
I'm not sure if the above clinches it, crossnote. The earth was not literally destroyed with water as we are required to read 2 Peter if doing so literalistic ally, and then apparently replaced by another earth (as opposed to "the world that then existed"). Going from the account in Genesis, it was the people and the animals (and also presumably many plants) that were destroyed, not the actual earth (though of course the earth may have moved around some). His reference to the earth is strictly to living things, otherwise it becomes incoherent.
So his comparison, on his own terms, isn't simply 1:1. Analogies should not be made to run on all fours - his point is that the human history itself contains judgement, and is no excuse to scoff. That's the point he makes.
Anyway, I think a lot of it boils down to whether you are a YEC or fit into some other group. I think it would be difficult to be a YEC and not believe in a truly global flood, and it may well be the case that belief in a global flood requires you to then adopt a YEC position.
I tend to hold to a localised position, though I'm by no means dogmatically behind any of the positions. I have trouble reconciling the idea of a simultaneous Earth-wide flood (despite the people, based on what Biblical evidence there is, living mostly in one regional location) with what we otherwise know of the world. I'm not talking complicated theories of evolution, but much more straightforward assessments of the fossil record, etc, that if we were wrong about, we would likely have to conclude either that our ability to think is so compromised that almost everything we know about the world, the Bible, etc is suspect, or that the world is deliberately arranged in such a way as for us to draw false conclusions about it.
So his comparison, on his own terms, isn't simply 1:1. Analogies should not be made to run on all fours - his point is that the human history itself contains judgement, and is no excuse to scoff. That's the point he makes.
Anyway, I think a lot of it boils down to whether you are a YEC or fit into some other group. I think it would be difficult to be a YEC and not believe in a truly global flood, and it may well be the case that belief in a global flood requires you to then adopt a YEC position.
I tend to hold to a localised position, though I'm by no means dogmatically behind any of the positions. I have trouble reconciling the idea of a simultaneous Earth-wide flood (despite the people, based on what Biblical evidence there is, living mostly in one regional location) with what we otherwise know of the world. I'm not talking complicated theories of evolution, but much more straightforward assessments of the fossil record, etc, that if we were wrong about, we would likely have to conclude either that our ability to think is so compromised that almost everything we know about the world, the Bible, etc is suspect, or that the world is deliberately arranged in such a way as for us to draw false conclusions about it.
J
jaybird88
Guest
i was refering to the date itself 10500 , its recorded in egypt, sumeria, india and china. know one for sure knows what the date means, only that its a date shared by many cultures around the world. some have connected it with a flood or maybe an ice age. i dont remember if it was connected to the black sea flood or not.
your right that some of these people when they mention the flood, they refer to it as in the time of their ancestors who came from another land. common in the Americas who believed their ancestors came from across the sea in the direction of Europe and Africa.
"The word "earth" used in the passages of Genesis is the Hebrew word "erets" (Strong's O.T. #776). Erets does not actually carry any connotation of a global, spherical planet in its translation. While it has been translated as "earth" many times, it is also translated "country" 140 times, "land" 1,476 times, and "ground" 96 times in the Old Testament. In the various references to erets it can be shown it is most often used to infer a limited land area rather than the entire planet.
Examples: Cain was cursed by God, he was driven "from the face of the earth" (Gen. 4:14). Lot's daughters stated, "there is not a man in the earth (erets)" (Gen. 19:31). Of the plague of locusts in Egypt; "For they covered the face of the whole earth [erets]" (Exodus 10:15). At the time when Joseph was in Egypt there existed a "famine over all the face of the earth [erets]" (Gen. 41:56)
Noah
Examples: Cain was cursed by God, he was driven "from the face of the earth" (Gen. 4:14). Lot's daughters stated, "there is not a man in the earth (erets)" (Gen. 19:31). Of the plague of locusts in Egypt; "For they covered the face of the whole earth [erets]" (Exodus 10:15). At the time when Joseph was in Egypt there existed a "famine over all the face of the earth [erets]" (Gen. 41:56)
Noah
Last edited: