Jump to content
IGNORED

Questions about Noahs Flood (is it logical or just magic you have to believe)


Leyla

Recommended Posts


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  17
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,272
  • Content Per Day:  1.73
  • Reputation:   1,677
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/27/2019
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, one.opinion said:

How does that possibly acknowledge a 6 day creation? It acknowledged divine blessing on the institution of marriage, nothing more. Saying anything beyond that adds your own words on top of the words of Scripture.

This passage acknowledges Noah, and suggests a flood. It does not acknowledge a global flood. Claiming it does once again adds a personal interpretation on top of the words of Scripture.

Sorry Jesus said from the begining of creation. That is acknowledging that creation as understood in the bible had happened. Ditto for Noah.

It is only a bias towards evolution that allows the reading of Noahs flood to be anything other than what it discribes. A global flood.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  5
  • Topic Count:  17
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  3,272
  • Content Per Day:  1.73
  • Reputation:   1,677
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  01/27/2019
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, JoeCanada said:

Or the Israelites walking for 40 years in the desert when it's only about a 3 day walk in total

Yes and why did they wander for 40 years?

The answer to that question makes sence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  16
  • Topic Count:  104
  • Topics Per Day:  0.04
  • Content Count:  3,776
  • Content Per Day:  1.29
  • Reputation:   4,746
  • Days Won:  2
  • Joined:  03/31/2016
  • Status:  Offline

2 hours ago, JoeCanada said:

Or the Israelites walking for 40 years in the desert when it's only about a 3 day walk in total

Read Numbers 13 and 14.  Read Deuteronomy 1

Actually, the Bible states that it's about an 11-day walk.  Deuteronomy chapter 1 explains that.  They started from Horeb and finished the journey at Kadesh Barnea.

And it probably took about 11 days - the first time.  But when they got there, Moses sent spies over and the spies came back whining and scared [except for Caleb and Joshua] and the people started whining for the umpteenth time and claiming that God hated them.

At that time, God had had enough.  Moses ask God to forgive and God said that he did forgive them.  He also said that that because these people who SAW what he did in Egypt did not trust him that they would not see the Promised Land, not even Moses.  But Joshua and Caleb would.

God said that they would see what it was like to have God against them and that they would turn back and wander for 40 years - one year for each day that the spies saw what was in the Promised Land.  [In my opinion, this hurt God because they saw the good and wonderful, but chose to only report on their fears.]

He said they would wander in the desert until the last of that generation dropped dead.

God can make you get lost in your own closet if he so chooses.

Edited by Jayne
  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 hour ago, Who me said:

Sorry Jesus said from the begining of creation.

Take a minute and read the context. Jesus is not talking about a 144 hour creation, he is talking about Adam and Eve. There is no claim regarding any time frame for creation.

1 hour ago, Who me said:

Ditto for Noah.

There is nothing in the words of Jesus that claim that the flood was global.

You are using your own interpretation bias to add to the words of Jesus Christ.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,689
  • Content Per Day:  2.41
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  06/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

On 4/29/2019 at 1:21 PM, one.opinion said:

To me, what God has revealed in both His Word and nature are both true. When the physical evidence is so completely contrary to a truly global flood, then the truth of the Bible must be something other than a global flood.

Ooops.  Grammatical, or factual,  or presumptive error there, again.   Presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to the Bible is sinful,  besides also being in error, and wrong, and false.

Presuming that the Bible is wrong is even more dangerous, I would reckon,  sin wise - as God sees all and judges perfectly.

Thus,  we start with the truth of God's Word,  including the necessary global flood.

Then,  that rules out any so-called 'evidence' that says otherwise,  i.e. that is opposed to God and His Word.

Case Closed.  

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

31 minutes ago, simplejeff said:

Presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to the Bible

There is a difference between "presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to the Bible" and "presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible." I am doing the latter, not the former. You cannot claim to be free of error in your own interpretations.

Check out this link, it will help explain why it is perfectly reasonable to hold a Biblical interpretation that differs from yours:

https://www.blueletterbible.org/faq/don_stewart/don_stewart_666.cfm

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,689
  • Content Per Day:  2.41
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  06/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

15 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

There is a difference between "presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to the Bible" and "presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to YOUR INTERPRETATION of the Bible." I am doing the latter, not the former. You cannot claim to be free of error in your own interpretations.

You are presenting a strawman with no substance.   Don't presume someone is interpreting anything when they are not.

No one can make you trust God,  not even God will do that.  
 

Without trust, without faith,  it is impossible to please God.  He Says So.  (don't try to mis-interpret that too!?)

  • Thumbs Up 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Royal Member
  • Followers:  6
  • Topic Count:  29
  • Topics Per Day:  0.01
  • Content Count:  5,240
  • Content Per Day:  2.13
  • Reputation:   1,356
  • Days Won:  4
  • Joined:  07/03/2017
  • Status:  Offline

1 minute ago, simplejeff said:

You are presenting a strawman with no substance.

I'm afraid you don't understand the concept of a "strawman". I have stated that I believe the Biblical flood account refers to a local flood, instead of a global flood. You reply by stating that "Presuming that the physical evidence is contrary to the Bible is sinful". That is a strawman, since I did not in any way make the claim that physical evidence is contrary to the Bible.

I am not aware of anything I have said that constitutes a strawman argument. If so, I invite you to point it out.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Mars Hill
  • Followers:  12
  • Topic Count:  12
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  7,689
  • Content Per Day:  2.41
  • Reputation:   2
  • Days Won:  20
  • Joined:  06/30/2015
  • Status:  Offline

16 minutes ago, one.opinion said:

That is a strawman, since I did not in any way make the claim that physical evidence is contrary to the Bible.

The physical evidence all lines up with the Bible,  i.e. a global flood, 

except of course ,  like evidence given by a spy to trick the enemy,  the evidence is fabricated to make it look 'real'.

IF someone is tricked by falsified evidence (and I agree, most people are) ,  what can they then do ?  < shrugs > I don't know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • Group:  Non-Conformist Theology
  • Followers:  1
  • Topic Count:  1
  • Topics Per Day:  0.00
  • Content Count:  137
  • Content Per Day:  0.07
  • Reputation:   52
  • Days Won:  0
  • Joined:  03/11/2019
  • Status:  Offline
  • Birthday:  05/27/1943

There may be several grains of truth to the flood mythology of Noah and similar mythologies from elsewhere in the ancient Middle East. About 25 years ago it was discovered (" Noah's Flood" by Ryan and Pitman) that in antiquity the Black Sea was a freshwater lake with a water level at least 155 meters (510 feet) below its present level. It was cut off from the Mediterranean Sea by a silt plug in the Straits of Bosporus. This plug broke through about 7600 YBP due primarily to the dramatic rise in sea levels caused by the melting that ended the last ice age.. It created an immense waterfall whose sound was most likely audible for 100 or more miles. The Black Sea basin filled to its present level over a period of several weeks. It is estimated that the shore line advanced at the rate of a mile or more per day. For the people living around the lake it was a catastrophe of immense magnitude. It was likely the single most memorable flood in all of human history. The racial memory of this event probably inspired the Gilgamesh epic which in turn inspired the Noah narrative in the Bible. The evidence for this flood is scientifically solid. This prompted the National Geographic Society to finance an underwater search along the ancient shoreline for evidence of pre-flood human habitation. This search has been successful! A settlement has been found at a depth of 90 meters approximately 12 miles off the coast of Turkey. It is in a remarkable state of preservation because it is located in an area of the Black Sea where the water is completely devoid of oxygen with the effect that biological decomposition does not take place. This means that wooden artifacts such as tools, planks, housing beams etc are preserved intact. What is also quite amazing is that while there is solid scientific evidence for this local flood some 7600 YBP, there is no evidence at all for a worldwide flood just 4300 YBP. One would think that a more recent, more catastrophic event would have wiped out evidence of the earlier Black Sea event. There is also evidence for a similar event causing the flooding of the Gulf of Arabia about 10,000 YBP.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...