|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,909 Year: 4,166/9,624 Month: 1,037/974 Week: 364/286 Day: 7/13 Hour: 2/2 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: What the KJV Bible says about the Noah Flood | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3735 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
You're reply to me is patronising in the extreme and totally ignores the point of my post.
The water may have been gathered in one place, but it doesn't say that the land was gathered in one place as well. That's just your pet theory and you are willing to twist and turn to avoid accepting that there is no statement that the land was gathered, either into one place or numerous places. All it says is that the land appeared, and was called Earth. Do you get it yet? As for Genesis 11.7/8, that is completely irrelevant to what the texts say about the flood. Could you please concentrate on that? The texts say nothing about the layout of the land, but they do say something about the layout of the water. Can you accept that the texts make NO statement about the layout of the land? If you can't then provide the quote which describes the layout of the land. I've asked for this before and have yet to receive an answer from you. Remember, I'm asking for what the texts say, not what you think the texts mean, so I expect a direct quote. When can we expect to actually have a post from you about the flood?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Boof Member (Idle past 276 days) Posts: 99 From: Australia Joined: |
ICANT writes: I only have one problem wih your presentation. quote:-------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 1:10 And God called the dry land Earth; and the gathering together of the waters called he Seas: and God saw that it was good. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That says He called the dry land Earth. He did not call the dry lands Earths. Now if you can find me a Scripture that says lands and Earths I will reconsider my position.
However 'He' does call the ocean 'waters' and 'seas' which seems to contradict the statement that the water was all gathered in one place. Or perhaps it's the same issue with land and lands?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
AdminPD Inactive Administrator |
ICANT,
I'm seeing more on creation than I am on Noah's flood. Please keep the topic on Noah's flood and what the Bible says about Noah's flood. ThanksAdminPD
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3735 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
I'm going to go back to the opening post and ask if ICANT agrees that the texts support the idea that there were people around at the time of the flood. That way we can start pinning down a time fame. I've said this before, but I've yet to get a response.
Edited by Trixie, : No reason given. Edited by Trixie, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DWIII Member (Idle past 1782 days) Posts: 72 From: United States Joined: |
ICANT writes:
Did He say the water was to gather to one place?
quote: Does the underlined/bold say waters gathered together unto one place? Yes/No Does the underlined/bold say let the dry land appear? Yes/No Does that mean the water gathered to one place causing dry land to appear which God called Earth?
One thing puzzles me, which, after a whopping 150-plus posts, seems to be dancing around an important issue: What was the geographical context at the time when this was actually written? If this creation text originated in the Mesopotamian region, the only sizable body of water that civilization would really know about is the Persian Gulf, and then it would make sense that there would be only one (1) sea (i.e., one place for the waters to gather). If the Mesopotamian culture also had sufficient knowledge of the surrounding lands (perhaps from contacts from Egyptian civilization), they would also have known about (2) the Mediterranean Sea and (3) the Red Sea. And surely, the ancient Israelites (being at the crossroads of the Middle East) would almost have certainly known about all three at some point. However, given the limited geographical knowledge of the times, how could anyone know that those three bodies of water were ultimately connected at much further distances? Is it not more plausible that the original creation texts, and subsequent Biblical writings, reflected the limited (but growing) geographical knowledge of the peoples who wrote it in the first place? Edited by DWIII, : typo-fixDWIII
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
Hi ICANT,
I know this point gets raised from time to time in discussions with you, but it's time to raise it again. How are you deciding when God uses supernatural means and when he relies upon natural methods? For example, God creates the entire universe ex nihilo via supernatural means, including humans, but when he scatters the people around the globe they aren't supernaturally transported but apparently have to travel by their own means. There are many possible interpretations of the Bible. Its why so many different religious sects are based upon this single book. Your own personal interpretation isn't of any particular interest, but given the number of people throughout history who believed they had arrived at the one, right and true interpretation of the Bible, why you think you're unique in this regard would be fascinating to expore. That were having this discussion has much more to do with your psychology than it does with the Bible. I'm not proposing a change in focus, we should move on to discuss the flood, but your ideas about the flood will suffer from the same problems as your ideas about creation. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi DWIII,
DWIII writes: One thing puzzles me, which, after a whopping 150-plus posts, seems to be dancing around an important issue: What was the geographical context at the time when this this was actually written? If you had read my posts there would be no puzzle as I have stated that the Earth's geography was the same at the time of the writing as it is today. The dividing of the dry land that appeared in Genesis 1:9, 10 that God called Earth took place more than a thousand years before the writing of Genesis. And yes the writer of Genesis knew about the Red Sea as they had crossed it just a few years prior to the writing of Genesis. He also knew about a body of water that had land mass on the other side as he fled there and stayed for 40 years.
DWIII writes: Is it not more plausible that the original creation texts, and subsequent Biblical writings, reflected the limited (but growing) geographical knowledge of the peoples who wrote it in the first place? A lot of things may be plausible but the author of Genesis was with the only eye wittness to the creation for 40 days. The same eye wittness that was there at the time of the flood. But if the land mass was in one place as it was at Pangea with the water in one place the geography would be a lot different than it is today. It could have been a flat piece of dirt like Grand Cayman in the Cayman Islands. The highest point above sea level is 79 feet. If that was the case then it would not require much water to cover the highest point with 15 cubits of water. So the volume of water needed to cover Mt Everest would be a non argument. How the animals got to all the different continents would be a mute point. How people got to all the places they were found would be solved. Why all civilizations when discovered worshiped some kind of a God would be solved. Why all civilizations when discovered had a flood story would be solved. Why there is no world wide evidence of a global flood would be solved. So the geography at the time of the flood is very important to being able to discuss the flood of Noah. If the geography was as I suggest there would be few problems. With the current discussions of Noah's flood in all the threads I have read so far the geography is as it is today creating a lot of problems that did not exist at the time of the flood. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22505 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9 |
ICANT writes: If the geography was as I suggest there would be few problems. Your problem is a lack of faith in your God's power and majesty. A God who can create an entire universe in six days can do anything. God's most wonderful miracles should not be denied. The God of the universe could do everything you say even if the continents were scattered throughout the cosmos. --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Trixie Member (Idle past 3735 days) Posts: 1011 From: Edinburgh Joined: |
Ok, I'll bite. Going by your own statements you obviously agree with the texts that there were people around at the time of the flood.
Pangaea is thought to have broken up 175 million years ago and humans are thought to have been around for the last 250,000 years or so. How do you reconcile this discrepancy?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
DWIII Member (Idle past 1782 days) Posts: 72 From: United States Joined: |
ICANT writes:
DWIII writes: One thing puzzles me, which, after a whopping 150-plus posts, seems to be dancing around an important issue: What was the geographical context at the time when this this was actually written? If you had read my posts there would be no puzzle as I have stated that the Earth's geography was the same at the time of the writing as it is today. The dividing of the dry land that appeared in Genesis 1:9, 10 that God called Earth took place more than a thousand years before the writing of Genesis.
What, more than a thousand years after this Earth-shattering event??? Surely, writing must have existed in some form during this incredible time of immense geographic upheaval, since people clearly existed then. Why then no contemporaneous accounts for cross-reference?
And yes the writer of Genesis knew about the Red Sea as they had crossed it just a few years prior to the writing of Genesis. He also knew about a body of water that had land mass on the other side as he fled there and stayed for 40 years.
You are presuming that the writer of Genesis was Moses. Where, in Genesis, does it state that Moses wrote this stuff himself? There is no such indication in the text, so how do you get that from what Genesis tells us?
DWIII writes: Is it not more plausible that the original creation texts, and subsequent Biblical writings, reflected the limited (but growing) geographical knowledge of the peoples who wrote it in the first place? A lot of things may be plausible but the author of Genesis was with the only eye wittness to the creation for 40 days. The same eye wittness that was there at the time of the flood. But if the land mass was in one place as it was at Pangea with the water in one place the geography would be a lot different than it is today.
Well, of course, the geographic model of a primitive creation story (Genesis 1) would be quite a lot more simple than a less-primitive story (Genesis 10) whose entire purpose is to explain, after the fact, why the more recently-learned-about geography of Genesis 10 just doesn't fit in at all with the Genesis 1 version of geography. Isn't it interesting that we are limited to go by the problematic interpretations of a single inspired text only, when just a handful of inspired maps could have quite easily settled any ambiguity along those lines? Edited by DWIII, : typo-fixDWIII
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Percy,
Percy writes: I know this point gets raised from time to time in discussions with you, but it's time to raise it again. How are you deciding when God uses supernatural means and when he relies upon natural methods? All natural methods are supernatural as God created the natural laws. So I don't see a difference in any of them.
Percy writes: God creates the entire universe ex nihilo via supernatural means, including humans, but when he scatters the people around the globe they aren't supernaturally transported but apparently have to travel by their own means. But I don't believe God created the entire universe ex nihilo. I believe the universe has always existed in some form just not in the form we see it today. Now if you know when the beginning of Genesis 1:1 took place you could share that information. So God's scattering the people on the face of the Earth by confounding their language is no problem for me. The dividing the land mass into the continents as we see it today is no problem. God created the Earth and everything on the Earth obeys His every command except mankind. That is the reason He destroyed the people on Earth with the flood of Noah. It is also the reason that many wars have been fought.
Percy writes: There are many possible interpretations of the Bible. Agreed. I have over a hundred different Bibles on my computer. I also have thousands of fragraments of the old writing in Hebrew and Greek, including the DSS.
Percy writes: why you think you're unique in this regard would be fascinating to expore. I don't have an option. I am either right and will reap the rewards. OR I am wrong and will pay the price for being wrong. Why do you think I have spent 48 years searching the scripturers and everything I can get my hands on to find the truth?
Percy writes: That were having this discussion has much more to do with your psychology than it does with the Bible. Maybe, but I think it is because I am still questioning everything. I do get a lot of input here as well as a lot of garbage. So I can discuss what I believe and compare to the answers I get and thus examine my beliefs to fine tune them.
Percy writes: we should move on to discuss the flood, but your ideas about the flood will suffer from the same problems as your ideas about creation. But I have been discussing the flood. I have been trying to determine what the geography was at the time of the flood. Since all the water under the heavens was gathered to one place with dry land protruding up out of it and not in the configuration it is today makes it a lot easier for the flood to have occured. I have asked many times in many different threads, "what would you expect to find" refering to a global flood. Well if all the dry land was in one place and was then divided as Pangea is said to have done after the flood had taken place you would not be able to find evidence for a global flood. The text I have presented and studied here states the Earth (the same word for the dry land in Genesis 1:10) was divided in the days of Peleg. Land all in one place, as presented by Pangea.Flood occurs. Land is divided into many places to which the land masses began to slow down to the rate they are moving today. So I don't have any problems with enough water to flood the land mass that had appeared out of the water when the water was collected to one place. Now you an others do have a problem with what I have presented but that is not my problem. That is yours. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Percy,
Percy writes: Your problem is a lack of faith in your God's power and majesty. I don't have a problem with what God can do. He could have caused the dry land to become wet land again just as easily as He caused the water to gather together in one place and allow the dry land to appear. But the text does not say He did it that way. The land mass at the time of the flood could have been as it is today with Mt Everest to be covered and God would have had no problem covering it with water. He could have raised the sea bottom and flooded the mountain tops, or He could have caused the dry land to become wet land again but the text does not say that. The text teaches that the land mass whatever shape it was in in Genesis 1:10 when He called it Earth was covered by water that fell in the form of rain and water that came from the fountains of the deep. That water covered the highest land mass by 15 Percy writes: A God who can create an entire universe in six days can do anything. And why do you think God created the entire universe in six days? You are refering to the 7 days of Moses found in Genesis 1:2 - 2:3. Genesis 1:1 says the heavens and the Earth existed prior to Genesis 1:2. Genesis 2:4 says in the day the Lord God created the Earth and the heavens. My God created the universe and Earth in one day not six.
Percy writes: The God of the universe could do everything you say even if the continents were scattered throughout the cosmos. Yes my God could do that. He could also have thousands of universes and Earths with people inhabiting them if He so desires. He just did not tell us about them as we don't need to know that information. So what ever the shape of the land mass at Genesis 1:10 called Earth, it was all connected as to allow the people to migrate to the separate parts of the land after God confounded their language and the quit building the tower to heaven because they could no longer understand each other. Mankind became wicked and God decided to start over and Noah found grace in the eyes of God. Grace is unmerited favor. No one deserves it and can only obtain it by the grace being bestowed upon them. So God bestowed His grace upon Noah and told him to build an ark as the world was going to be flooded.
quote: Since Noah found grace in the eyes of God he was told how to escape the flood that was going to come.
quote: God told Noah He was going to destroy mankind with the Earth. So Noah was instructed to build an ark of gopher wood and he was to make rooms in it and pitch it within and without with pitch. Pitch was a tar product. God gives Noah directions as to how to build the ark. He was to set a door in the side and place a window at the top. There was to be lower second and third stories below the door in the side. So the door was in the side on the forth floor which was 46.875 feet from the bottom. I am using the cubit of Sir Isaac Newton of 25 inches which was called the Holy cubit. Using Newton's Holy cubit the ark would have been 625 feet long, 104.16 feet wide, and 61.625 feet high. The ark could have had a draft of 44 feet without any problem. Everytime the ark is mentioned here at EvC it is usually refering to an ocean going boat. Well the ark was not a boat. The ark was built as a rectangle with a flat bottom according to the instructions I have read. Everybody here argues the ark would have colapsed from the exterior water pressure on the vessel. Nobody reads the verse where Noah was told to build rooms inside the ark. The ark would have been built with partion walls from side to side with floors just like you find in the larges wood hotel in existence today. So it would have been braced from end to end and side to side as well as from floor to floor. There would have been no problem with the structure of the ark. Next objection there was not enough room to house the animals. I have asked before and will ask again how much floor space would have been required to house the animals. Take into consideration God was going to supply the animals that was to be transported and therefore would have probably supplied young ones that would have been small. The last time I drew a ark for bluejay I was able to put 18 acres of storage space in the ark building the rooms on the four floors without any problems. I could make the rooms smaller for specific animals and could get at least 10 acres more storage room if it was required. Now if someone would tell me exactly how much room is required I would see what I can produce. There would be 4,011,787.5 cubic feet in the ark. After 120 years the ark was completed.
quote: Mankind had 120 years prior to the flood. At which time the ark was finished and ready. Noah was told to gather of all food that was eaten for the trip. He was not told how much to gather. Whatever he gathered was enough.
quote: Noah was not told to round up any animals for the trip.
quote: So when Noah was in the ark the animals came into the ark, as God had commanded. Some things of note about the ark. There was no preprations made by Noah for waste materials as that apparantly was not his job. Noah was told how to build the ark and to gather food for the journey. When the ark was finished and the time for the flood to begin Noah was told to go into the ark, with his family. When all cargo was aboard God shut the door.
quote: Whenever my God seals something it is protected until He unseals it. The rain began and the fountains of the deep opened up.
quote: The water increased and covered the dry earth causing all air breathing creatures to perish.
quote: Wherever dry land existed it became wet land and everything perished. The water prevailed upon the Earth 150 days and then began to assuage.
quote: After another 150 days the water was abated.
quote: Finally Noah opened the roof and looked and the Earth was dry.
quote: Then God told Noah to go forth and he and those with him did.
quote: Noah was told to go forth and replenish the earth. The same Hebrew word מלא used here was used in Genesis 1:28 and translated replenish as that is what was necessary as the Earth had been populated before the flood. Now there are those who say that boat won't float. By my caculations it should draw at least 44 feet of water. But according to the text the draft was 0 feet.
quote: The ark was on the surface of the water. Scientifically impossible. But not a problem for my God. Now if you or anyone else believes the Bible text says something else present it. God Bless, Edited by ICANT, : Replace meters with the proper measurment of cubits."John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
jar Member (Idle past 424 days) Posts: 34026 From: Texas!! Joined: |
ICANT writes: The text teaches that the land mass whatever shape it was in in Genesis 1:10 when He called it Earth was covered by water that fell in the form of rain and water that came from the fountains of the deep. That water covered the highest land mass by 15 meters. I don't think so. Here is Genesis 1 in full:
quote: Sorry but nothing in there about "That water covered the highest land mass by 15 meters" or any fountains of the deep or even any mountains.Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi Trixie,
Trixie writes: Ok, I'll bite. Going by your own statements you obviously agree with the texts that there were people around at the time of the flood. I even believe there was people on Earth prior to Genesis 1:2. In fact according to the text man was the first lifeform on planet Earth.
Trixie writes: Pangaea is thought to have broken up 175 million years ago and humans are thought to have been around for the last 250,000 years or so. How do you reconcile this discrepancy? Magic words thought to have broken up 175 million years ago. There are a lot of things that are thought to be. Lets see that number is arrived at by assuming that the rate the continents are moving at today has always been the rate of movement. Then again it could have been moved instantly and just has not competely stopped yet. So no I don't have a problem, and don't see a discrepancy. The text that has been discussed in this thread states the Earth (same as the dry land in Genesis 1:10) was divided in the days of Peleg. Which was after the flood. There are a lot of assumptions that have been made about the flood also. But assumptions are just that. They are things that are assumed to be true whether they are true or false. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.6 |
Hi jar,
jar writes: Sorry but nothing in there about "That water covered the highest land mass by 15 meters" or any fountains of the deep or even any mountains. And nobody said the land mass in Genesis 1:10 was covered in water. But for your information all land in Genesis 1:2 was wet land as there was no dry land.
quote: There was no dry land in Chapter 1 of Genesis until the waters was gathered into one place and dry land appeared in Genesis 1:9. So yes the dry land in Genesis had been covered with water. God Bless,"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024