|
Understanding through Discussion |
|
|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
| EvC Forum active members: 66 (9164 total) |
|
| |
| ChatGPT | |
| Total: 916,474 Year: 3,731/9,624 Month: 602/974 Week: 215/276 Day: 55/34 Hour: 1/2 |
| Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
| Author | Topic: The Bible is literally true, but each detail is not. | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Please pardon my ignorance in that I am not familiar with your convictions regarding the veracity of the Flood tradition. I spelled it 'Flud' for a reason 
I must, of course, take issue with the suggestion that the flood was a global event, i.e. planet wide. I am confident that it was not, and my evidences are drawn from textual considerations rather than geological ones (although I am quite impressed with the geological evidence). I read your previous post. I was taught, while studying the KJV, that the word "earth" could mean the ground, like "dirt". And that all the earth being covered could mean that the ground/dirt was covered, not the planet Earth (as you explained). But, (and I don't have time to look it up right now) I thought there was a verse that says that all the creatures in the whole world died. Do you know what I'm referring too?
I suppose we could cop out and say that the flood is metaphorical of harmful nature and the ark a symbol of superior veterinary skill but somehow I expect you would reject that tack (I hope). Nah, no argument here. Sorry to disappoint 
So. Shall we discuss it here, or shall we have it out in a separate thread? Or were you being facetious? Not necessarily facetious, no. I'm not really sure what it literally says, but I'm sure it could be interpreted to say either way. I'd like to hear what you know about all the creatures dying, preferably in this thread. I don't think a slight tangent would be a problem if we don't go too far. That is, unless one of us gets Moosed  Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence. Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith. Science has failed our world. Science has failed our Mother Earth. -System of a Down, "Science" He who makes a beast out of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man.-Avenged Sevenfold, "Bat Country"
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
New Cat's Eye Inactive Member |
Catholic Scientist writes: Also, why the need for the ark at all if only a portion of the life was being killed off? Same reason an 'ark' is needed in any flood. No, no, no. This is a whole different situation. From Gen 6:
quote: And Gen 7:
quote: God is punishing ALL of the flesh, like, the whole planet it seems. Granted ALL could be referring to just the region that Noah lived in, but the way its worded, it really does sound like god is whiping the planet clean and starting over. Why the need to start over again if its just one small portion of the whole world and not the whole world itself? Can't you see how it sounds like god is talking about the whole planet?
I think an analogy may be drawn between Noah's Flood and Katrina's. One might say that "the dry land" was destroyed by Katrina. One might say that "every living thing died" that was on "the dry land;" Or, that everything "on the ground" was destroyed. How many people, how many cats and dogs were drowned in that disaster? Even so, a man with a boat might save both family and animals. One might say that every pet died which was not in the boat. One might say that were it not for the boat, no one and no pets would have been saved out of that great flood. There is no need to point out the fact that the area flooded was a small portion of one continent. Everyone in our time is aware of that flood's limitation, even those who were involved (if they thought about it). Even so, from the perspective of those who were there, on the ground, in the water, struggling for their lives, the affected area was devastatingly vast; extending to the horizon and beyond. There was no hope of escaping the general destruction (drowning, exposure, dehydration, starvation) unless, of course, there was a boat (or a helicopter). I am sure that many of those rescued from that watery death could appreciate a poetic description of the event in terms of water covering the whole world. It did, in fact, cover their whole world. I don't totally disagree with you that the Flud was not global, but I think it could go either way. Its too hard to tell one way from the other.
On the other hand one cannot always attribute the text to allegory or metaphor. As with any great puzzle, one must study the pieces individually and collectively. In the case of a great word puzzle, such as the Holy Bible, one must consider each word individually and in its context; and trace the evolution of each word and each idea presented. Short of gruelingly tedious and exhaustive research there can be no understanding of such archaeological artifacts (strange marks on broken tablets, bits of ink on rotting leather, hieroglyphs on moldy papyrus; all of it in dead languages). I agree. Its not a simple as reading a few choice versus and saying yeah it was global or not.
With more than 100 English language translations available and more than 1000 denominations of Christianity competing for that "One True" interpretation; I think we can agree that if this is "God's Word" then "God" doesn't give a rip whether we understand it or not. Word.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024
